Reduced Complexity Demodulation of MIMO BICM Using Group Detection Thesis

THE IBY AND ALADAR FLEISCHMAN FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES
Reduced Complexity
Demodulation
of MIMO Bit-Interleaved
Coded Modulation
using IQ Group Detection
Thesis submitted for the degree

“Master of Science in Engineering Sciences”
by
Zak Levi
Submitted to the Senate of Tel-Aviv University
February 2006
THE IBY AND ALADAR FLEISCHMAN FACULTY OF ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENT OF INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES
Reduced Complexity
Demodulation
of MIMO Bit-Interleaved
Coded Modulation
using IQ Group Detection
Thesis submitted for the degree

“Master of Science in Engineering Sciences”
by
Zak Levi
Submitted to the Senate of Tel-Aviv University
This research work was carried out at the
Department of Electrical Engineering - Systems,
Tel-Aviv University
Under the supervision of
Dr. Dan Raphaeli
February 2006
Abstract
In this thesis we propose a novel reduced complexity technique for the de-
coding of multiple-input multiple-output bit interleaved coded modulation
(MIMO-BICM) using IQ Group Detection (GD). It is well known that the
decoding complexity of the MAP detector for MIMO-BICM increases ex-
ponentially in the product of the number of transmit antennas and num-
ber of bits per modulation symbol, and becomes prohibitive even for simple
schemes. We propose to reduce complexity by partitioning the signal into
disjoint groups at the receiver and then detecting each group using a MAP
detector. Complexity and performance can be traded off by the selection
of the group size. Group separation and partitioning is performed such as
to maximize the Mutual Information between the transmitted and received
signal. For schemes employing independent IQ gray mapping Conventional
MMSE per antenna detection is identified as a special case of group detec-
tion corresponding to a group size of one. It is shown that for moderate
to high SNR Using a group size if two with optimized group partitioning
shows a gain of 1-2[dB] under a fast Rayleigh fading channel, and by 3-4[dB]
under a Quasi static Rayleigh fading channel, with some increase in decod-
ing complexity. It is also shown that higher gains can be achieved using a
larger group size with a further increase in complexity. We further propose
an ad hoc Iterative Group Cancelation scheme using hard decision feedback
i
to enhance performance.
ii
1.2 Terminology
AW GN Additive White Gaussian Noise
BICM Bit Interleaved Coded Modulation
BER Bit Error Rate
CSI Channel State Information
GD Group Detection
GDF E Generalized Decision Feedback Equalizer
IC Interference Canceling
IS Interference Suppression
M AP Maximum Ap-posteriori
MI Mutual Information
M IM O Multiple Input Multiple Output
M M SE Minimum Mean Square Error
M SE Mean Square Error
N0 White noise spectral density
NT X Number of antennas at the transmitter
NRX Number of antennas as the receiver
Ng Number of groups
Np Number of partitioning possibilities
SIC Successive Interference Cancelation
SISO Single Input Single Output
SN R Signal to Noise Ratio
SV D Singular Value Decomposition
Tx Transmitter
V BLAST Vertical Bell Labs Space-Time Algorithm
Rx Receiver
W MF Whitening Matched Filter
ZF Zero Forcing
iii
iv
Acknowledgments
I wish to express my appreciation and gratitude to Dr. Dan Raphaeli for his
professional guidance.
I wish to express my appreciation and gratitude to RAMOT for providing
finical support throughout the research
I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to my parents and to
my girlfreind for standing by me along the entire research.
I would also like to express my gratitude to the numerous cafè’s in the Tel
Aviv area for their warm hospitality during the writing of these lines . . .
Contents
1 Introduction and Backgroud 1
1.1 MIMO-BICM Prior Art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.2 Thesis Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.3 Outline of Thesis Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
2 System model and notations 9
2.1 Connection to MIMO OFDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
2.2 Review of MIMO-BICM MAP detection . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
3 Group Detection 16
3.1 Group Separation Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2 Group LLR Computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
3.3 Simplified LLR Computation for group size 2 . . . . . . . . . . 25
3.3.1 Computing P . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3.3.2 Connection to MSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
3.3.3 Simple Antenna Partitioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
v
CONTENTS vi
4 Group Partitioning 33
4.1 Simplified Partitioning for 2 × 2 scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
4.2 Ad hoc Simplified Partitioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
4.2.1 Simplified Partitioning group size 2 . . . . . . . . . . . 40
4.2.2 Simplified Partitioning group size 4 . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.3 Mutual Information Rayleigh fading channel . . . . . . . . . 43
5 Iterative Group Interference Cancelation 48
5.1 Group Partitioning For Iterative Group Detection . . . . . . . 50
6 Simulation Results 52
6.1 Fast Fading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.1.1 Fast Fading 2x2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
6.1.2 Fast Fading 4x4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
6.2 Quasi Static Fading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2.1 Quasi Static Fading 2x2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.2.2 Quasi Static Fading 4x4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6.3 Simulation Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
7 Conclusions 64
8 APPENDIX 65
8.1 Simplification of Q̃(aG ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
8.2 Computing Ree for the 2 × 2 scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

CONTENTS vii
8.3 Whitening Eigenfilter maximizes the Mutual Information . . . 71
8.3.1 Optimization Problem Simplification . . . . . . . . . . 71
8.3.2 Optimization Problem Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
Bibliography 78
List of Figures
2.1 MIMO-BICM NRX x NT X System Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.1 Group Detection Scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
3.2 Simplified LLR computation for Group size 2. . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4.1 2 × 2 Capacity Loss Per Antenna Vs Group Detection. . . . . . . 45
4.2 4 × 4 Capacity Loss Per Antenna Vs Group Detection. . . . . . . 46
4.3 4 × 4 Capacity Loss GD Optimal Search Vs Simple Search. . . . . 47
5.1 Iterative Group Detection Scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50
6.1 Simulator Block Diagram (Initial Stage). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
6.2 2 × 2 16QAM,64QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh. . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
6.3 4 × 4 16QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
6.4 4×4 16QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh Optimal Search Vs Simple Search. 59
6.5 2 × 2 16QAM Quasi Static Fading Rayleigh. . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
6.6 4 × 4 16QAM 4 Groups Simple Search Quasi Static Fading Rayleigh. 62
6.7 4 × 4 16QAM 2 Groups Simple Search Quasi Static Fading Rayleigh. 63
viii
List of Tables
4.1 Number of Group Partitioning Possibilities . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
4.2 Group Partitioning Possibilities for 2 × 2 scenario . . . . . . . . . 37
4.3 Error Covariance Matrices for Group Partitioning of 2 × 2 scenario 37
6.1 Fast Rayleigh fading MAP,GD,PA BER Comparison, 2 × 2 . . . . 55
6.2 Fast Rayleigh fading MAP,GD,PA BER Comparison, 4 × 4 . . . . 57
6.3 Quasi static Rayleigh fading GD,PA PER Comparison, 2 × 2 . . . 61
6.4 Quasi static Rayleigh fading GD,PA PER Comparison, 4 × 4 . . . 61
ix
Chapter 1
Introduction and Backgroud
The increasing demand for spectrally efficient transmission techniques,the
constant demand for higher bandwidth and the pioneering work of Foschini
[7] and Telatar [8] led to a tremendous interest in the transmission through
Multiple Input Multiple Output (MIMO) channels. Information theory pre-
dictions suggested that under a rich scattering channel the channel capacity
would scale linearly with the minimum of the number of transmit and receive
antennas. In MIMO transmission the increased number of spatial dimensions
can be used to improve the probability of error and to increase the trans-
mission rate. Loosely speaking, schemes that exploit the spatial dimensions
to improve the probability of error are said to maximize the diversity gain
while schemes that use the spatial dimensions to increase the transmission
rate are said to maximize the multiplexing gain. Space Time Codes (STC)
and especially Space Time Block Codes (STBC) [9] received a lot of attention
due to their ability to exploit the Diversity Gain in a simple way, however
1
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUD 2
the coding gain provided by STBC was very limited an non full rate STBC
codes introduce bandwidth expansion. In general STBC could not support
the high spectral efficiencies predicted for MIMO. Spatial Multiplexing (SM)
techniques that transmit different bit streams on each one of transmitting an-
tenna were shown to achieve high spectral efficiencies and thus to exploit the
multiplexing gain. The first SM detection algorithm for MIMO signals was
the Vertical Bell Labs Layered Space-Time (VBLAST) algorithm [7]. The
algorithm worked by detecting the strongest data stream, subtracting that
stream from the received signal and repeating the process for the remaining
data streams. The first V-BLAST system [7] demonstrated unprecedent spec-
tral efficiencies ranging from 20-40bits/s/Hz. It was soon realized that the
V-BLAST algorithm suffered performance degradation through the cancela-
tion process via error propagation. Research for alternate MIMO detection
algorithms was ignited giving rise to various detection techniques amongst
them were Bit Interleaved Coded Modulation (BICM) based techniques.
BICM is a well known transmission technique widely used in practical
single-input single-output (SISO) systems. In SISO the BICM approach re-
ceived a lot of attention due to its ability to exploit diversity under fading
channels in a simple way [1, 2]. The BICM approach is counter intuitive
at first glance since it suggests that in some channels (specifically Rayleigh
fading) more reliable channel codes can be designed by separating coding

and modulation. Traditional schemes that combine coding and modulation
typically attempt to maximize the minimum Euclidean distance of the code,
however under fading channels code performance depends strongly on the
minimum Hamming distance of the code. The BICM approach attempts
to maximize the code diversity, this is achieved by bit wise interleaving at
the encoder and by using an appropriate soft-decision bit metric as an input
to the decoder. Optimal soft bit metrics are obtained by Maximum Ap-
Posteriori (MAP) decoding, MAP decoding of BICM transmission involves
the computation of the Log Likelihood Ratio (LLR) for each transmitted
bit. Inspired by such an approach BICM was proposed as a transmission
technique for multi carrier MIMO systems [10, 3]. The LLR computation for
each transmitted bit is performed using a detector. For MIMO channels the
detector complexity is exponential in the product of the number of trans-
mit antennas and number of bits per modulation symbol. Even for simple
scenarios this complexity becomes overwhelming.
1.1 MIMO-BICM Prior Art
Various techniques have been suggested to reduce the computational burden
of the MAP detector. Most of them can be classified into either list sphere
detector based techniques, or Interference Suppression and Cancelation based
techniques. The list sphere detector was proposed by [18, 11] and is a mod-
ification of the sphere decoder. The sphere decoder is an efficient algorithm
for finding the nearest lattice point to a noisy lattice observation. The vector
space spanned by the MIMO channel matrix is regarded as a lattice and the
received signal as its perturbed version. The algorithm searches for the near-
est lattice point in a sphere around the perturbed received lattice point. The
list sphere detector is a modification of the sphere decoder and enables the
production of approximate LLR values for coded bits. The complexity and
performance of the list sphere detector greatly depend on the selection of the
sphere radius and the list size. These depend on the Channel matrix and the
SNR. An iterative scheme using the list sphere detector and a turbo code was
reported to closely approach capacity of the multi antenna fast Rayleigh fad-
ing channel [18]. The complexity of the list sphere detector is generally much
higher then that of decoding techniques employing Interference Suppression
and Cancelation.
The second class of decoding techniques employ Interference Suppression
and Cancelation. The MAP detector is approximated by linear processing of
the MIMO channel outputs followed a per antenna LLR computer. In [13]
the authors proposed a Zero Forcing (ZF) detector followed by a per antenna
LLR computer. The authors made the simplifying assumption of white post
equalization interference. In [14] a Minimum Mean Squared Error (MMSE)
based detector was derived followed by a per antenna LLR computer without
the assumption of white post equalization interference. It was shown that
such a receiver has the same complexity as the one in [13] but offers superior
performance. The authors in [19] proposed an iterative scheme comprising of
a soft Interference Canceler (IC), an adaptive MMSE detector followed by a
per antenna LLR computer and a soft output decoder. Soft outputs from the
decoder were used to both reconstruct estimates of the channel output and
to adapt the MMSE detector. The reconstructed channel output estimates
were subtracted from the true received signal (IC) and the resulting signal
was detected via the adaptive MMSE detector and the LLR computer. It
was shown that when bit reliability at the output of the soft decoder was
high the adaptive MMSE detector coincided with the Matched Filter. A
reduced complexity approximation to [19] was proposed in [12] where the
soft output decoder was replaced by a hard output Viterbi decoder and the
soft Interference Canceler by a hard one. After the first decoding stage
,due to the lack of soft information from the decoder, correct decisions were
assumed. After the initial decoding stage the MMSE detector was replaced
by a Matched Filter.
1.2 Thesis Contributions
In this thesis we propose a Group Detection (GD) Interference Suppression
based technique. GD was widely studied in the context of Multi User De-
tection (MUD) in CDMA systems [4]. The idea is to jointly detect a subset
of the transmitted information while treating the rest of the transmission as
noise. Many existing detection techniques can be regarded as Group Detec-
tion based techniques, namely the per antenna detection techniques where
each antenna can be identified as a single group. The authors in [5] used
Group Detection in the context of V-BLAST decoding ( [7]) as a remade for
error propagation. In their work a group of the worst p sub-channels was
jointly detected using ML decoding. A DFE was then used to detect the rest
of the sub-channels. In [6] a GD scheme was proposed as a trade off between
diversity gain and spatial multiplexing gain by partitioning the signal at the
transmitter into groups. Each group was encoded separately and per group
rate adaptation was performed.
In our work group detection was employed only at the receiver side with
no special treatment at the transmitter. Unlike [5, 6, 14, 12, 19] where a group
was defined as a collection of antennas/sub-channels, we define a group as a
collection of In Phase and Quadrature (I/Q) components of the transmitted
symbols possibly from different antennas. The smallest group is defined
as a single (I/Q) component of the a transmitted symbol. The GD scheme
consists of group partitioning, group separation and detection. The proposed
GD scheme was derived from an information theoretic point of view. Group
separation was performed by linear detection. Under a Gaussian assumption

on the transmitted signal, the MMSE detector was identified as a canonical
(information lossless) detector for group detection. A group partitioning
scheme was derived such as to maximize the sum rate. The selection of
the group size allowed us to tradeoff performance with complexity. At one
end when the number of groups was set to one, the entire transmission was
jointly detected and the scheme coincided with full MAP, while at the other
end each dimension was decoded separately. An Iterative group interference
canceling technique using hard outputs from the decoder similar to [12] was
also investigated. Finally, performance was evaluated via simulations using
a rate 1/2 64-state convolutional code with octal generators (133,171) and
random interleaving. The proposed GD scheme was compared to the full
MAP detection scheme and the standard MMSE scheme [14, 12] for both
fast Rayleigh fading and quasi static Rayleigh fading channels. Under such
channels GD showed gains of up to 4[dB] with respect to conventional per
antenna detection with a some increase in complexity. gains of up to 10[dB]
was obtained with further increase in decoding complexity.
1.3 Outline of Thesis Report
The organization of this thesis report is as follows. In Chapter 2 the system
model is presented along with a review of MIMO-BICM MAP detection.
Chapter 3 introduces the concept of Group Detection and deals with group
separation and detection. Group partitioning is addressed in Chapter 4. It-
erative Group Interference Cancelation is discussed in Chapter 5. Simulation
results for fast and quasi static Rayleigh fading are presented in Chapter 6,
and Chapter 7 concludes this thesis report.

Chapter 2
System model and notations
We consider a MIMO-BICM system with NT X transmit and NRX receive an-
tennas as illustrated in Fig. 2.1. The information bit sequence b = [b1 , ..., bNb ]
is encoded into coded bits which are then interleaved by a random interleaver.
The interleaved bits, denoted by c = [c1 , ..., cNc ], are mapped onto an 2m
QAM signal constellation using independent I&Q gray mapping. The block
of Nc /m symbols is split into sub-blocks of length NT X . At each instant n a
sub-block ac (n) = [ac1 (n), ..., acNT X (n)]T is transmitted simultaneously by the
NT X antennas. We assume that the transmitted symbols are independent
with a covariance matrix Raa = σa2 · INT X ×NT X . The NRX × 1 received signal
is denoted by y c (n) = [y1c (n), ..., yN

c
RX
(n)]T and is given by
y c (n) = H c (n) · ac (n) + z c (n) (2.1)
Where H c (n) is the NRX ×NT X complex channel matrix [hci,j (n)]i=1..NRX ,j=1..NT X
and is assumed to be perfectly known at the receiver (full CSI at the re-
9
CHAPTER 2. SYSTEM MODEL AND NOTATIONS 10
TX a1
Binary bi Random ci Symbol

Source
Encoder
Interleaver Mapper (Gray)
S/P
aN
TX
y1 RX
Detector bi
De
(Bit LLR) Interleaver Decoder
yN
RX
Figure 2.1: MIMO-BICM NRX x NT X System Model.
ceiver). z(n) is an NRX ×1 additive white complex Gaussian noise vector
z c (n) = [z1c (n), ..., zN

c
RX
(n)]T with a covariance matrix of Rzz = σz2 ·INRX ×NRX .
For simplicity we consider the case where NT X =NRX ≡ NT . The extension
to an arbitrary number of transmit and receive antennas satisfying NT X ≥
NRX is strait forward.

2.1 Connection to MIMO OFDM
Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing (OFDM) is a well known trans-
mission technique widely used for transmission over frequency selective chan-
nels. In general OFDM transforms the Inter Symbol Interference (ISI) chan-
nel into a set of orthogonal sub-channels or sub-carriers and thus greatly
simplifying equalization. This property made OFDM transmission a popular
selection in many modern communication systems.
The system model described in the previous section can be used to de-
scribe a MIMO-OFDM system by interpreting the instant index n as a fre-
quency (subcarrier) index. Each block of Nc /m symbols corresponds to a
single OFDM symbol with NC /(mNT X ) sub carriers. In such a model H c (n)
corresponds to MIMO channel experienced by the nth subcarrier. For per-
formance evaluation in Chapter 6 we consider two channel models, a fast
Rayleigh fading channel and a quasi static flat Rayleigh fading channel.
These two channel models represent two extreme ends. The fast fading chan-
nel assumes no correlation between sub carriers while the flat fading assumes
full correlation between sub carriers. The fast Rayleigh fading channel can
be used to approximate the channel experienced by a well interleaved OFDM
system operating in strong multi-path environment [3]. Adjacent subcarrier
channel coefficients are in general not independent, however with frequency
interleaving within one OFDM symbol the resulting channel can be approx-
imated by an independent fast fading channel. Strong multi-path environ-
ments are common in Non Line Of Sight (NLOS) channels. Under a quasi
static flat Rayleigh fading channel all sub-carriers experience the same chan-
nel for the duration of a single OFDM symbol, and the channel changes from
symbol to symbol in an independent fashion. The quasi static flat Rayleigh
fading channel models a channel that is flat in the frequency domain, such
channels are common in narrow band systems. For the reminder of this thesis
we omit the instant index n for clarity of notation.
2.2 Review of MIMO-BICM MAP detection
The decoding scheme is shown in Fig. 2.1,the MAP detector performs soft
de-mapping by computing the conditional Log Likelihood Ratio(LLR) for
each coded bit. The conditional LLR of the k th coded bit is the logarithm
of the ratio of the likelihood that the bit was a one, conditioned by the
received signal and channel state, to the likelihood that the bit was a zero,
conditioned by the received signal and channel state (full CSI at the receiver).
The conditional LLR for the k th coded bit is given by
Ã © ª!
Pr ck = 1| y c , H c
LLR( ck | y c , H c ) = log © ª (2.2)
Pr ck = 0| y c , H c
For clarity and ease of notation from here on we omit conditioning on the
channel matrix H c from our notation. Using Bayes rule

¡ ¯ ¢
© c
ª Pr y c ¯ ck = 1 · Pr {ck = 1}
Pr ck = 1| y = ¡ ¢ (2.3)
Pr y c
¡ ¢
Since the probability Pr y c is not a function of the ck will cancel out
Eq. 2.2. Once more by the use of Bayes rule, the conditional bit probability
is given by
© ª X © ¯ ª © k−1 Nc ¯ ª
Pr ck = 1| y c = Pr y c ¯ ck = 1, c1k−1 , cN ¯
k+1 · Pr c1 , ck+1 ck = 1| · Pr {ck = 1}
c
(2.4)
ck−1
1 ,cNc
k+1
Each block of bits at the output of the channel encoder are in general
statistically dependent. We make the assumption of an ideal interleaver that
scrambles the coded bits in such a way that each block of interleaved bits
c contains bits from different coded blocks rendering the bits in c to be
statistically independent. Thus follows that
© ª X © ¯ ª Y
Pr ck = 1| y c = Pr {ck = 1} · Pr y c ¯ ck = 1, ck−1
1 , c Nc
k+1 · Pr {ci }(2.5)
ck−1 ,cNc i6=k
1 k+1
the LLR the k th coded bit is given by
 © ¯
P ª Q 
Pr y c ¯ ck = 1, ck−1 Nc
1 , ck+1 · Pr {ci }
¡ ¢  c1k−1 ,cNk+1
c i6=k 
LLR ck | y = LA (ck ) + log 
c
 P © ¯ ª Q (2.6)
Pr y c ¯ c = 0, ck−1 , cNc ·
k 1 Pr {c } 
k+1 i
c1k−1 ,cNc i6=k
k+1
Define the ap-posteriori LLR of the kth bit as

Pr {ck = 1}
LA (ck ) = log (2.7)
Pr {ck = 0}
and noting that
eiLA (i)
Pr {ck = i} = (2.8)
i∈{0,1} 1 + eLA (i)
Substituting Eq. 2.8 into Eq. 2.6 gives
 P 
© c¯
P ª ci LA (ci )
¯ k−1 Nc
 k−1 Nc Pr y ck = 1, c1 , ck+1 · e
i6=k

¡ ¢  c1 ,ck+1 
LLR ck | y = LA (ck ) + log 
c
 P © ¯ ª
P (2.9)
ci LA (ci ) 
 Pr y ¯ ck = 0, c1 , ck+1 · e
c k−1 Nc i6 =k 
c1k−1 ,cNc
k+1
| {z }
LE ( ck |y c )
Define Slk,r ⊂ C NT as the set of all complex QAM symbol vectors whose
k th bit in the r th symbol is l ∈ {0, 1}. Under the assumption of AWGN the
LLR the k th coded bit is given by:
the conditional LLR of the k th coded bit is given by
 2 P 
P − 1
σz2 kyc −H c ãc k + ci LA (ci )
 e i6=k

¡ ¢  k,r 
 ã c ∈S

LLR ck | y c = LA (ck ) + log  1
 (2.10)
 P − σ12 kyc −H c ãc k2 + P ci LA (ci ) 
 e z i6=k 
ãc ∈S0k,r
| {z }
LE ( ck |y c )
The first term in Eq. 2.10 is the ap-priori likelihood of the bit of interest
while the second term is the extrinsic likelihood of the bit of interest. When
using iterative schemes extrinsic and ap-priori likelihoods are exchanged be-
tween the detector and decoder. For non iterative schemes like the ones
considered in this work, the ap-priori likelihoods of all bit are assumed to be
zero. The resulting likelihood of the k th bit is given by
 
P −
1
σz2 k
y c −H c ãc k
2
 e 
¡ ¢  ãc ∈S1k,r 
LLR ck | y c
= log  
 P − 1 kyc −H c ãc k2  (2.11)
 2
e σz 
ãc ∈S0k,r
The complexity of the LLR computation for each bit is 2m·NT −1 and is
thus exponential in the product of the M-QAM constellation size and the
number of antennas.
Chapter 3
Group Detection
Before presenting the group detection scheme let us reformulate the system
model using real signals only. Eq. (2.1) is transformed into
· ¸ · ¸ · c ¸ · c ¸
y cR HRc −HIc aR zR
= · + (3.1)
y cI HIc HRc c
aI z cI
The subscripts R or I imply taking the Real or Imaginary part of the
Vector or Matrix it is associated with. For clarity of notation for the rest
of this paper all real vectors and matrices derived from the complex ones
described in Sec. 2 will inherit the names of their complex versions without
the superscript c. For example from here on the vector
£ © ª © ª¤T
a = real {ac1 } , ..., real acNT , imag {ac1 } , ..., imag acNT
Denote the number of real dimensions as N = 2 · NT The transmitted signal
a is partitioned into Ng disjoint groups of equal size M , where M = N /Ng .
The extension to non equal size groups is trivial. Let Ω = {1, 2, . . . N } be
16
CHAPTER 3. GROUP DETECTION 17
Nx1 Mx1
WG1 LLR
â G 1
Mx1
y Nx1
WG2 LLR b̂
â G2 P/S Deinterleaver Decoder

Nx1 Mx1
W G Ng LLR
â G N
g

Group Separation Group Detection
Figure 3.1: Group Detection Scheme.
the set of indexes of entries in the transmitted vector a. Define the group
partitioning of Ω into disjoint groups Gi such that:Gi ⊂ Ω ,|Gi | = M and

Sg
N
Gi = Ω. For any a ∈ <N , the group aGi ∈ <|Gi | is a subgroup of a that is
i=1
made up of ak , ∀k ∈ Gi . The channel experienced by the group Gi , namely
HGi , is a sub matrix of H and is made up of the columns of H namely hk
such that ∀k ∈ Gi . At the receiver the groups are separated by an N × N
separation matrix denoted as W . The sub-matrix WGi of size M × N ,that
filters out the i th group out of the received vector y, is made up of the rows
of the matrix W , namely wTk such that ∀k ∈ Gi . The separate detection
of real and imaginary parts of the transmitted symbols is possible due to
the independent I&Q mapping rule. The separation scheme is depicted in
Fig. 3.1
3.1 Group Separation Matrix
Given a group partitioning scheme, we propose to optimize the separation
matrix W such as to maximize the sum rate
Ng
X ¡ ¢
I WGi y; aGi (3.2)
i=i
Denote the output of the separation matrix corresponding to the group
Gi by
âGi ≡ WGi y (3.3)
Eq. (3.2) is maximized by choosing the group separation matrix WGi such
as to maximize the Mutual Information between each transmitted group and
the output of the separation matrix
M ×N
WGopt
i
= arg max {I (aGi ; âGi )} (3.4)
WGi
The optimization problem in Eq. (3.4) was solved in two ways each giving
rise to a different solution. The first solution was derived from a matrix
algebraic point of view and turned out to be the well known whitening eigen-
filter, the derivation is believed to be novel and is included in Appendix. (8.3).
The second solution was derived form an information theoretic/estimation

theoretic point of view similar to [16, 25] and turned out to be the well known
MMSE estimation filter. The latter derivation is simple and the solution is
attractive from a computational point of view and will thus be used in our
group detection scheme. Following is the information theoretic/estimation
theoretic proof. From the data processing inequality [15] follows that
¡ ¢ ¡ ¢ ¡ ¢
I y; aGi ≥ I WGi y; aGi = I âGi ; aGi (3.5)
Thus if exists a separation matrix WGi that achieves the equality in
Eq. (3.5) then it clearly maximizes the mutual information in Eq. (3.4) and
in Eq. (3.2). We next prove that, under the Gaussian assumption on the
transmitted signal and channel noise, the sub-matrix of the MMSE estima-
tion matirx of a from y, corresponding to the group Gi achieves the equality
in Eq. (3.5). The MMSE estimation matrix is denoted by W mmse and given
by
· ¸−1
σ2
W mmse
= −1
Ray Ryy =H T
HH + z2 IN ×N
T
(3.6)
σa
The sub-matrix for group Gi is given by
· ¸−1
σ2
WGmmse = HGT i HH + z2 IN ×N
T
(3.7)
i
σa
The estimation error covariance matrix is given by

−1
Ree = Raa − Ray Ryy Rya (3.8)
and the estimation error covariance matrix for the group Gi is a sub-
matrix of Ree and is denoted by ReG. For simplicity of notation we con-

e
i Gi
S
sider two groups namely G and G, such that G G = Ω. Consider the
MMSE Estimation of a from y using the matrix in Eq. (3.6). Sine both the
transmission vector and the additive noise are assumed Gaussian, from esti-
mation theory follows that the linear MMSE estimation of a from y namley
© ª
âmmse coincides with the orthogonal projection E a| y and that the esti-
mation error e = a − âmmse is Gaussian and independent of âmmse . From
linearity follows
· © ª ¸
mmse mmse
© ª E © aG | y ª
â =W y = E a| y = (3.9)
E aG | y
© ª
Where the orthogonal projection of aG form y namely E aG | y is de-
noted by âmmse
G . The estimation error eG = aG − âmmse
G is then Gaussian
and independent of âmmse

G thus
eG = eG | âmmse
G = aG | âmmse
G − âmmse
G | âmmse
G (3.10)
From Eq. (3.10) follows that the covariance matrix R aG |âmmse

G aG |âmmse
G
=
ReG eG . Since the differential entropy of a Gaussian random vector is only a
function of the covariance matrix follows that

h (aG | âmmse
G ) = h (eG ) (3.11)
Consider the mutual information between the sub-vector of âmmse cor-
responding to the estimation of group G namely âmmse

G and the transmitted
group aG
¡ ¢
I WGmmse y; aG = I (âmmse G ; aG ) =
h (aG ) − h (aG | âmmse
G ) = (3.12)
h (aG ) − h (eG )
The first equality in Eq. (3.12) follows from the definition of âmmse
G , the
second equality follows from the definition of the mutual information and the
last equality follows from Eq. (3.11). The mutual information between the
transmitted group G and the received signal y is given by
¡ ¢
I aG ; y = h (aG ) − h (aG | y) =
(3.13)
h (aG ) − h (eG )
The first equality in Eq. (3.13) follows from the definition of the mu-
tual information and the second equality follows since the covariance of the
MMSE estimator of ammse

G from y equals the covariance of the estimation
error namely R aG |y aG |y = ReG eG and that aG | y is Gaussian. Thus from
Eq. (3.12) and Eq. (3.13) follows that
¡ ¢
I aG ; y = I (aG ; âmmse
G ) (3.14)
QED
Changing G with G in the above proves the same for the group G. Thus
we have proved that the selection of the MMSE estimation matrix in Eq. (3.6)
as the group separation matrix maximizes the mutual information between
each one of the groups at the transmitter and the appropriate output of
the separation matrix, and thus maximize the sum rate in Eq. (3.2). For the
remainder of this paper, for clarity of notation, we omit the mmse superscript
form âmmse and use â. We also refer to Eq. (3.6) as the MMSE separation
matrix.
3.2 Group LLR Computation
The output of the MMSE separation matrix for group G is given by
âG = WGmmse HG aG + WGmmse (HG aG + z) (3.15)

| {z }
vG
Where HG is the N × |G| sub matrix of H corresponding to group G and

¯ ¯
HG is the N × ¯G¯ sub matrix of H corresponding to group G,and G∪G = Ω.
Denote by v G the noise experienced by group G, the covariance matrix of v G
is given by
h i
σa2 σz2
RvG vG = WGmmse 2
HG HGT + I
2 N ×N
(WGmmse )T (3.16)
The conditional LLR for the k th coded bit, where k belongs to the set of
coded bits mapped into one of the symbols belonging to group G is given by
µ ¶
Pr { ck = 1| âG }
LLR( ck | âG ) = log (3.17)
Pr { ck = 0| âG }
To compute Eq. (3.17) we need the conditional pdf P r ( âG | aG ). From
Eq. (3.15) and under the Gaussian assumption on the inter group interfer-
ence [24] follows
¡ ¢
âG | aG ∼ N WGmmse HG aG , RvG vG (3.18)
The fact the the noise term in Eq. (3.15) is colored complicates the eval-
uation of Eq. (3.17). We propose to whiten the noise in Eq. (3.15). The
noise covariance matrix is symmetric positive semi-definite and thus has the
following eigen value decomposition
RvG vG = UG ΛG UGT (3.19)
Where UG is a |G| × |G| unitary matrix and ΛG is a |G| × |G| diagonal
matrix of the eigen values of RvG vG .
UG (UG )T =³ I|G|×|G| ´ (3.20)

ΛG = diag λG 1 , . . . λ G
|G|
The noise whitening matrix is given by
−1
FG = ΛG 2 UGT (3.21)
The output of the group whitening separation matrix for group G is given
by
âG = FG WGmmse HG aG + ṽ G (3.22)
where
RṽG ṽG = I|G|×|G|
The conditional LLR is then derived by using Bayes law and the ideal
interleaving assumption. The conditional LLR is given by
 P 2 
e− 2 kâG −FG WG k
1 mmse H
G ãG
 ã ∈S k,r 
 G G,1 
LLR(ck | âG ) = log  P 2 (3.23)
 e− 2 kâG −FG WG HG ãG k 
1 mmse
k,r
ãG ∈SG,0
k,r
SG,l ⊂ R|G| is the set of all real |G| dimensional PAM symbol vectors
whose k th bit in the r th symbol is l ∈ {0, 1}. The complexity of the LLR
m
computation for all groups is Ng 2 2 |G| and is exponential in the product of
the group size and the number of bits per real dimension. We are then able
to trade off performance with complexity by the selection of group size.

3.3 Simplified LLR Computation for group

size 2
For a group size of Ng = 2 it is possible to derive a simplified closed form
approximation for the LLR without computing the noise whitening matrix
in Eq. (3.21). The derivation is in the spirit of [14] and can be done for an
arbitrary group size. The LLR will be derived given a zero forcing separation
matrix. The MMSE structure will then emerge from the derivation. As in [14]
by using the log max approximation [2] the conditional LLR can be expressed
as
¡ ¢ © ¡ ¯ ¢ª © ¡ ¯ ¢ª
LLR ck | y ≈ max logP r âzf ¯ aG = d − max log P r âzf ¯ aG = d (3.24)
k,r k,r
d∈SG,1 d∈SG,0
Where
¡ ¢−1 T
âzf = H # y = H T H H y = a + w̃ (3.25)
H # is the ZF separation matrix given by the Moore Penrose pseudo in-
verse of H. The noise covariance matrix is given by
¡ ¢−1
Rw̃ w̃ = 12 σz2 H T H (3.26)
Let the group G = {i, j}. Under the Gaussian assumption on the post
detection interference [24] follows that

¡ ¯ ¢
P r âzf ¯ aG = √ 1
exp{− 21 Q (aG )} (3.27)
(2π)M |ΛG |
where Q (aG ) is given by
³ ´T ³ ´
Q (aG ) = âzf − µG Λ−1
G âzf − µ G
. (3.28)
To find the mean and covariance in Eq. (3.27) we note that
X
âzf = ai ei + aj ej + ak ek + w̃ (3.29)
k∈{i,j}
/
where ei is the N × 1 ith unit vector. The mean and variance are given
by
© ¯ ª
µG = E ½âzf ¯ aG = ai ei + aj ej
³ ´³ ´T ¯¯ ¾
ΛG = E âzf − µG âzf − µG ¯¯ aG (3.30)
¡ ¢
= 12 σa2 IN ×N − VG VGT + Rw̃ w̃
£ ¤
where VG = ei ej . Substituting Eq. (3.30) into Eq. (3.27) gives
¡ ¢
Q (aG ) = âTzf Λ−1 T −1
G âzf − 2âzf ΛG ai ei + aj ej + a2i eTi Λ−1 2 T −1
G ei + aj ej ΛG ej(3.31)
Substituting Eq. (3.31) and Eq. (3.29) into Eq. (3.24) and noting that
the first term in Eq. (3.31) is not a function of aG and thus cancels out we
arrive at
¡ ¢ n o n o
LLR ck | y ≈ max Q̃ (d) − max Q̃ (d) (3.32)
k,r k,r
d∈SG,0 d∈SG,1
Where
¡ ¢
Q̃ (aG ) = −2âTzf Λ−1
G ai ei + aj ej + a2i eTi Λ−1 2 T −1
G ei + aj ej ΛG ej (3.33)
In Appendix. (8.1) we show that
³ mmse ´2 ³ âmmse ´2
â
Q̃ (aG ) = γii ipii − ai + γjj jpjj − aj + γij (âmmse
i − pij aj )2
¡ ¢2 (3.34)
+γij âmmse
j − p a
ij i + C
where
(1−p )p (1−p )p
γii = 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−p
jj ii
jj )−p
2 , γij = 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−p
1
jj )−p
2 , γjj = 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−p
ii jj
jj )−p
2(3.35)
ij ij ij
Note that C is not a function of aG and will cancel out in Eq. (3.32).pi,j
is the i,j th element of the matrix P , where P is given by
³ ¡ ¢−1 ´−1
σz2
P = IN ×N + σa2
T
H H (3.36)
The simplified computation of the LLR is illustrated in Fig. 3.2

Group Processing d i ∈ SGk ,,{1/

r
γi
1 0}
pii -
+ + 2
x ( ) x
aˆ im m se
+ 2
+ ( ) x
-
dj x
y
WGmmse pij γ ij +
di
aˆ mj m se x
- 2
+
+ ( ) x
2
x
+ + ( ) x
WGmmse 1 -
p jj
σ 2
z
d j ∈ SGk ,,{1/
r γj
2 0}
σ a
W mmse p ii a
x p ij c c=max(a,b)
Separation b
Matrix P p jj
H Computer ck=0 ck=0
Q(d)|ck=0
Q(d)|ck=1
ck=1 ck=1
Compute γ ii
γ γ ij
+
Sub-Block γ jj
+ -
Processing
LLR(ck)
Figure 3.2: Simplified LLR computation for Group size 2.
3.3.1 Computing P
The computation of P can be greatly simplified by exploiting its connection
to M M SE estimation. By using the matrix inversion lemma follows that

³ ¡ T ¢−1 ´−1 ³ 2 ´−1

σz2 σa
P = IN ×N + σa2
H H T
= I − σ2 H H + IN ×N (3.37)
z
Again from the matrix inversion lemma follows that
³ ´−1 ³ ´−1
σa2 σz2
σz2
HT H + IN ×N = IN ×N − H T
HH + T
I
σa2 N ×N
H (3.38)
Substituting Eq. (3.38) into Eq. (3.37) gives
³ ¡ ¢−1 ´−1 ³ ´−1

σz2 σz2
IN ×N + σa2
HT H = H T HH T + I
σa2 N ×N
H (3.39)
substituting Eq. (3.6) into Eq. (3.39)
P = W mmse H (3.40)
Thus we identify P as the effective channel at the output of the M M SE
separation matrix and can thus be computed by multiplying the already
computed W mmse by the channel matrix H.
3.3.2 Connection to MSE
To gain some insight into Eq. (3.34) we show yet another connection between
P and M M SE estimation theory. From Eq. (3.8) and Eq. (3.40) follows that
σa2
Ree = 2
(IN ×N − P ) (3.41)
Ree is the error covariance matrix resulting from MMSE estimation, its
diagonal elements [Ree ]i,i are the Mean Square Errors (M SEM M SE ) in the
estimation of each element of â.
© ª
M SEM M SE,i = [Ree ]i,i = E |ai − âmmse
i |2 (3.42)
The unbiased SNR (See [17]) of the ith element âi is given by
σa2
SN RM M SE U,i = SN RM M SE,i − 1 = 2 −1= pii (3.43)
M SEM M SE,i 1−pii
The bias compensation scaling factor is given by

σa2
2 1
σa2
= (3.44)
− M SEM M SE,i pii
2
âmmse âmmse
Thus i
pii
, jpjj in Eq. (3.34) are the unbiased M M SE estimates of ai
and aj respectively. We next prove that the best unbiased linear estimate of
âmmse
i from aj is pij aj . From Eq. (3.41) follows that
© ¡ ¢ª © mmse ª
pij = − σ22 E (ai − âmmse
i ) aj − âmmse
j = 2
σa2
E âj (ai − âmmse
i ) −
2
a
2 mmse (3.45)
σ2
E {ai aj } + σ2 E {âi aj }
a a
The first term in the second equality is zero from the orthogonality prin-
ciple and the second term in the second equality is zero since transmitted
symbols are statistically independent. Thus
© mmse ª
pij = 2
σa2
E {âmmse
i aj } = 2
σa2
E âj ai (3.46)
From linear estimation theory follows that
E {âmmse aj } 2
âmmse
i (aj ) = i
E {a2j }
aj = σa2
E {âmmse
i aj } aj = pij aj (3.47)
Since both aj and âmmse

i are zero mean follows that the best unbiased
linear estimate of âmmse

i from aj is pij aj . The same proof can be repeated for
âmmse
j .
Thus we have shown that 1/pii is the MMSE bias compensation factor
from [17] and that the best unbiased linear estimate of âmmse
i from aj is pij aj .
Thus in Eq. (3.34) we identify four euclidian distance terms.
3.3.3 Simple Antenna Partitioning
Let us consider the complex MMSE estimate of the complex symbol trans-
mitted form the k th antenna, namely âck . It is well known from estimation
theory that the MMSE estimate is biased and that the multiplicative bias
factor is real valued [17]. Thus the real/imaginary part of the MMSE es-
timate, form the k th antenna, namely real{âck }/imag{âck } is not a function

of the imaginary/real part of the symbol transmitted from the k th antenna.
Thus when the indexes i&j are taken as the Real and Imaginary parts of the
same transmit antenna follows that
©¡ ¢ª
E {(âmmse
i aj )} = 0, E âmmse
j ai =0 (3.48)
.
©¡ ¢ª
From Eq. (3.45)and Eq. (3.48) follows that pij = 0,E âmmse
i âmmse
j =0
and that pii = pjj . The detection of the Real and Imaginary parts of a
single antenna can thus be performed separately. Using the above Eq. (3.34)
coincides with the known LLR expression from [14] .
" #
¡ ¢
LLR ck | y ≈ SN RM M SE U,i max ψij2 (d) − max ψij2 (d)
k,r k,r
d∈∈S{i,j},0 d∈∈S{i,j},1
(3.49)
¯³ mmse ´ ³ âmmse ´¯
¯ â ¯
ψij (d) = ¯ ipii − d1 + j jpii − d2 ¯
Since for per antenna partitioning the Real and Imaginary parts of each
antenna can be detected separately Eq. (3.49) can be further simplified. The
LLR for coded bits ck that are mapped onto ai is reduced to
" #
¡ ¢ ³ ´2 ³ ´2
âmmse âmmse
LLR ck | y ≈ SN RM M SE U,i max i
pii
− d1 − max i
pii
− d1 (3.50)
k,r k,r
d1 ∈Si,0 d1 ∈Si,1
Thus per antenna partitioning is actually equivalent to a per dimension
partitioning and is a group detection scheme for group size one. The LLR
N m m
computation complexity is then reduced from 2
2 to N 2 2
Chapter 4
Group Partitioning
The number of ways to partition the transmitted signal into groups is a
function of the transmitted signal size N and the groups size M . For example
when both N and M are powers of 2 the number of partitioning possibilities
is given by Eq. (4.1)
µ ¶ Ã N ! µ ¶
1 N 1 /2 1 2M ¡ 1 ¢log2 (N/M ) N!
NP = N/ N/ . . . = (4.1)
2
2
2
4
2 M 2
M!
log2 (N/M
Q )
(N 2−i )!
i=1
Table 4.2 summarizes the number of partitioning possibilities for several
values of N and M .
Table 4.1: Number of Group Partitioning Possibilities

Scheme M NP
2 × 2 (N=4) 2 3
4 × 4 (N=8) 2 105
4 × 4 (N=8) 4 35
8 × 8 (N=16) 2 675675
8 × 8 (N=16) 4 225225
8 × 8 (N=16) 8 6435
33
CHAPTER 4. GROUP PARTITIONING 34
We are faced with the problem of choosing a partitioning scheme from
amongst all the partitioning possibilities. A natural selection would be to
choose the partitioning scheme that minimizes some probability of error mea-
sure, this although very intuitive is very difficult to trace analytically. Instead
we propose to select the partitioning scheme that maximizes the sum rate of
the groups.
By using the chain rule of mutual information the mutual information of
the MIMO channel can be written as Eq. (4.2)
¡ ¢ ¡ ¢ ¡ ¯ ¢ ³ ¯ ´
¯
I y; a = I y; aG1 + I y; aG2 ¯ aG1 + · · · + I y; aGN g ¯ aG1 , . . . , aGN g−1 (4.2)
When using the GD scheme information is not exchanged between groups,
and so the mutual information of Eq. (4.2) cannot in general be realized. The
mutual information (sum rate) given the GD scheme is given by Eq. (4.3)
Ng ¡
P ¢ ¡ ¢
I y; aGi ≤ I y; a (4.3)
i=1
The sum rate is simply the sum of mutual information since the groups
are disjoint. The mutual information in Eq. (4.3) can be written as
Ng Ng Ng
X ¡ ¢ X ¡ ¢ X ¡ ¯ ¢
I y; aGi = h aGi − h aGi ¯ y (4.4)
i=1 i=1 i=1
Using the fact that R a |y a |y = ReG eG (Eq. (3.13)) and assuming that
Gi Gi i i
¯
the Inter Group Interference is Gaussian [24] follows that aG ¯ y is also Gaus-
i
sian and that
Ng
X ¡ ¢ XNg
¡ ¢ 1X
Ng ³¯ ¯´
¯ ¯
I y; aGi = h aGi − log ¯ReGi eGi ¯ (4.5)
i=1 i=1
2 i=1
Under the assumption that transmitted symbols are i.i.d the first term in
Eq. (4.5) does not depend on the partitioning scheme, the determinants of the
¯ ¯
¯ ¯
error covariance matrices ¯ReG eG ¯, i = 1 . . . Ng are a function the partitioning
i i
scheme. Given a partitioning scheme {G1 , G2 , . . . GN g } the error covariance
matrix for the i th group ReG e is obtained from the covariance matrix Ree
i Gi
by striking out the k th rows and the k th columns ∀k ∈

/ Gi . Thus finding the
partitioning scheme that maximizes the mutual information in Eq. (4.5) is
equivalent to finding the partitioning scheme that minimizes the product of
the the determinants of the group error covariance matrices. Thus we need
to solve the following optimization problem
Ã Ng !
Y ¯¯ ¯
¯
{Gopt opt opt © ª
1 , G2 , . . . GNg } = Argmin G1 , G2 , . . . GNg ¯ReGi eGi ¯ (4.6)
i=1
s.t
{Gi ⊂ Ω, |Gi | = M,
Gi ∩ Gj = φ : ∀i, j :}
The complexity of the above search quickly becomes overwhelming (Eq. (4.1)).
To reduce the complexity of Eq. (4.6) we turn to the structure of Ree .

Since Ree is a real covariance matrix it is obviously symmetric positive semi-
definite, however its structure goes deeper due to the symmetry in the real
channel matrix H (Eq. 3.1). This structure can be utilized to greatly sim-
plify Eq. (4.6) for the 2 × 2 scheme. Intuition form the simplified expressions
for the 2 × 2 scheme will then lead us to develop simple suboptimal ad hoc
approximations to (Eq. (4.6).
4.1 Simplified Partitioning for 2 × 2 scheme
For the 2 × 2 antenna scenario the MMSE error covariance matrix (Eq. (3.8))
is given by:
· ³ ´−1 ¸
1 2 σz2
Ree = σ
2 a
I4x4 − H T HH T + I
σa2 4x4
H (4.7)
In Appendix. (8.2) we prove that
 
µ ¶ d −b 0 −c
2 1  −b a c 0 
Ree = ·   (4.8)
σa2 ad − b2 − c2  0 c d −b 
−c 0 −b a
Where hi denotes the ith column of H and the scalars α, a, b, c, d are
given by
2
α = σσz2 a = 1 + αhT1 h1 d = 1 + αhT2 h2
a (4.9)
b = αhT1 h2 c = αhT1 h4
For simplicity of notation we drop the scalar multiplying the matrix in
Eq. (4.8) since it will not affect the minimization of Eq. (4.6). For the 2 × 2
scenario there are 3 ways to partition the transmitted signal into groups of
size 2,namely
Table 4.2: Group Partitioning Possibilities for 2 × 2 scenario

Scheme G1 G2
1 {1, 2} {3, 4}
2 {1, 3} {2, 4}
3 {1, 4} {2, 3}
The group error covariance matrices corresponding to each partitioning
possibility are given in Table. (4.3).
Table 4.3: Error Covariance Matrices for Group Partitioning of 2 × 2 scenario

Scheme ReG1 eG1 ReG2 eG2
· ¸ · ¸
d −b d −b
1
−b a −b a
· ¸ · ¸
d 0 a 0
2
0 d 0 a
· ¸ · ¸
d −c a c
3
−c a c d
Denote the product of the determinants of the group error covariance
matrices of the ith partitioning scheme by Di , since all the error covariance
matrices are positive semi-definite their determinants are nonnegative.

∆ 2
D1 = (ad − b2 ) = (ad)2 − b2 (2ad − 1) ≥ 0
∆
D2 = (ad)2 ≥ 0 (4.10)
∆ 2
D3 = (ad − c2 ) = (ad)2 − c2 (2ad − 1) ≥ 0
Substituting Eq. (4.10) into Eq. (4.6) we obtain
Scheme =Arg min (Di ) (4.11)

i
From Eq. (4.10) and Eq. (4.11) follows that partitioning scheme 2 will
be chosen only in cases where 2ad < 1 or when both b and c equal zero. If
both b and c equal zero then all group selections result in the same mutual
information and any one of the three partitioning schemes can be selected.
To see what happens when either b or c do not equal zero we shall substitute
a and d from Eq. (4.9) and so
2ad
¡ =T 2+ ¡ ¢¡ ¢¢ (4.12)
2 αh1 h1 + αhT2 h2 + α2 hT1 h1 hT2 h2
The second term in the sum of Eq. (4.12) is non negative, denote it by
x2 . Thus Eq. (4.12) can be written as
2ad = 2 + x2 ⇒ 2ad ≥ 2 > 1 (4.13)
Thus the second partitioning scheme will never be better than schemes
1 and 3. This is not surprising since in Sec 3.3.3 we made the observation
that simple antenna partitioning is equivalent to separate detection of each
element and thus is a group detection scheme with group size of 1. The best
group partitioning is one of two, either jointly decode the I of antenna 1 with
the I of antenna 2 and the Q of antenna 1 with the Q of antenna 2 (Scheme
1) or jointly decode the I of antenna 1 with the Q of antenna 2 and the I of
antenna 2 with the Q of antenna 1 (Scheme 3). Substituting b and c from
Eq. (4.9) into Eq. (4.11) gives the following decision rule
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯
if ¯hT1 h2 ¯ > ¯hT1 h4 ¯ choose scheme 1 else chose scheme 3.
The above result is simple to compute and very intuitive. Each one
of the columns of the channel matrix H can be regarded as the channel
experienced by a single element of the transmitted signal. Elements are
thus grouped together based on the correlation between their corresponding
channels. This is intuitive since grouping correlated elements will result in
less noise enhancement in the group separation process.
4.2 Ad hoc Simplified Partitioning
In general for NT > 2 obtaining a closed form expression for the noise co-
variance matrix as was done for NT = 2 is hard to tackle. Instead we draw
intuition from the 2 × 2 scenario and propose ad hoc algorithms for the par-
titioning of a general NT × NT system into groups of 2 and 4.

4.2.1 Simplified Partitioning group size 2
The algorithm is a greedy one that partitions the transmitted signal into
groups of size 2 such as to maximize the correlation at the output of the
channel. The algorithm stats off with a candidate list consisting of all the
transmitted elements. At each stage, the algorithm finds the two maximally
correlated elements from the candidate list, groups them together and then
erases them from the candidate list.
Simplified partitioning algorithm for a group size of 2
1) n = 1, Φn = {(i, j) : ∀i < j}
¯ ¯
2) hi,j = ¯hTi hj ¯ , ∀(i, j) ∈ Φn
3) [in , jn ] = arg max(i,j)∈Φn (hi,j )
4) Gn = {in , jn }
5) Θn = {(k, jn ), (in , k), (jn , k), (k, in ) : ∀(k, jn ), (in , k), (jn , k), (k, in ) ∈ Φn }
6) Φn+1 = Φn \ Θn
7) if (+ + n) ≤ Ng goto 3 else end
Since matrix H T H is a byproduct from the computation of W mmse (see
Eq (A-7)) it needs not to be recomputed in stage 2. The above algorithm is
very simple and its complexity is that of finding the maximum entry from
a list. At each one of the Ng stages of the algorithm the list size decreases
drastically. This is a tremendous reduction compared the combinatorial com-
plexity in Eq. (3.15). In Sec (4.3) we show that under a Gaussian alphabet
and Rayleigh channel assumptions, for NT = 4 the loss of the simplified par-
titioning algorithm with respect to optimal partitioning increases with the
SNR. When transmitting 16bit/ChannelU se the loss is about 0.3[dB] and
when transmitting 30bit/ChannelU se the loss is about 0.45[dB]
4.2.2 Simplified Partitioning group size 4
The algorithm is a greedy one that partitions the transmitted signal into
groups of size 4 namely
Gn = {in , jn , kn , ln }
such as to maximize the following heuristical correlation measure
¡¯ T ¯¢
[in , jn ] = arg max 0 ,j 0 ¯h h ¯
¡¯ i ¯i j¯ ¯¢
kn = arg maxk0¡¯ ¯hTin hk¯0 ¯ +¯ ¯hTjn h¯k0 ¯ ¯ ¯¢ (4.14)
ln = arg maxl0 ¯hTin hl0 ¯ + ¯hTjn hl0 ¯ + ¯hTkn hl0 ¯
The correlation measure is built in the following fashion. First the pair of
elements with maximal correlation is found then the third element is selected
such that maximizes the sum of correlations with the already selected pair.
The fourth element is found using the same procedure thus selecting the ele-
ment that maximizes the sum of correlations with respect to the pre selected
triplet. Using the same notations as in the previous chapter the partitioning
algorithm is given by:
Simplified partitioning algorithm for a group size of 4
1) n = 1, Φn = {(i, j) : ∀i < j}
¯ ¯
2) hi,j = ¯hTi hj ¯ , ∀(i, j) ∈ Φn
3) [in , jn ] = arg max(i,j)∈Φn (hi,j )
4) kn = argmax∀k:(in ,k)&(jn ,k)∈Φn &k6=in ,jn (hin ,k + hjn ,k )
5) ln = argmax∀l:(in ,k)&(jn ,k)&(kn ,l)∈Φn &l6=in ,jn ,kn (hin ,l + hjn ,l + hkn ,l )
6) Gn = {in , jn , kn , ln }
7) Θn = {(t, jn ), (jn , t), (t, in ), (in , t), (t, kn ), (kn , t), (t, ln ), (ln , t) : ∀
(t, jn ), (jn , t), (t, in ), (in , t), (t, kn ), (kn , t), (t, ln ), (ln , t) ∈ Φn }
8) Φn+1 = Φn \ Θn
9) if + + n ≤ Ng goto 3 else end
Since matrix H T H is a byproduct from the computation of W mmse (see
Eq (A-7))it needs not to be recomputed in stage 2. The above algorithm is
very simple and its complexity is that of finding the maximum entry from
a list. At each one of the Ng stages of the algorithm the list size decreases
drastically. This is a tremendous reduction compared the combinatorial com-
plexity in Eq. (3.15).
In Sec (4.3) we show that under a Gaussian alphabet and Rayleigh chan-
nel assumptions, for NT = 4 the loss of the simplified partitioning algorithm
with respect to optimal partitioning increases with the SNR. When trans-
mitting 16bit/ChannelU se the loss is about 0.25[dB] and when transmitting
30bit/ChannelU se the loss is about 0.35[dB]
4.3 Mutual Information Rayleigh fading chan-

nel
The capacity loss resulting from group detection was computed for the Rayleigh
fading channel, thus the entries of the complex matrix H were independent
Gaussian random variables (Rayleigh Amplitude, uniform phase) with a vari-
ance of 1/NT generated independently at each instant. The expectation of
the capacity is given by
¡ ¢ ¯ 2 ¯
¯ ¯
C = E{I y; a } = E{ 12 log2 ¯ σσa2 HH T + IN ×N ¯} (4.15)
z
The expectation of the sum rate when using group detection is computed
using Eq. (4.5) and given by:

Ng ¡
P ¢ ¡1 ¢ Ng
P ³¯ ¯´
Ng M 1 ¯ ¯
E{ I y; aGi } = 2
log σ2
2 a
− 2
E{log ¯ReGi eGi ¯ } (4.16)
i=1 i=1
To probe the loss in capacity incurred by using group detection we turn
to simulations. Since the capacity we are interested in is ergodic we can
approximate the expectation in Eq. (4.15) and Eq. (4.16) by the instant
average. We consider the 2 × 2 and 4 × 4 systems and group sizes of 2 and 4
with Optimal Search (OS) partitioning, Simplified Search (SS) partitioning
and simple Per Antenna (PA) partitioning.
Fig. 4.1 summarizes results for a 2 × 2 system and shows that for medium
to high SNR group detection has a gain of around 1.5[dB] over the simple
per antenna partitioning and is only around 0.6[dB] from the capacity.
Fig. 4.3 summarizes results for a 4 × 4 system for groups of size 4 and 2.
For medium to high SNR, partitioning into groups of size 4 with optimal
group partitioning losses roughly 2[dB] from capacity. Using the simplified
partitioning algorithm losses roughly an extra 0.3[dB]. The simple antenna
partitioning scheme for a group size of 4 (two antennas per group) losses
roughly 3.5[dB] from capacity, thus smart group partitioning shows a gain
of roughly 1 − 1.5[dB] over simple per antenna partitioning.
For medium to high SNR, partitioning into groups of size 2 with optimal
group partitioning losses roughly 3.5[dB] from capacity, using the simplified
partitioning algorithm losses roughly an extra 0.4[dB]. The simple antenna

Rayleigh Fading Capacity (Ntx=Nrx=2)

18
Full Capacity
9.5 GD
16 PA
9
0.54[dB]
8.5
Bits/Channel Use
14
8
7.5
12
7
2[dB]
Bits/Channel Use
6.5
10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
SNR [dB]
6
0.64[dB]
13
12.5
4
Bits/Channel Use
12
11.5
2
11
2.09[dB]
10.5
16 18 20 22 24 26 28
S NR [d B ]
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
SNR [dB]
Figure 4.1: 2 × 2 Capacity Loss Per Antenna Vs Group Detection.
partitioning scheme (two antennas per group) losses roughly 5−5.5[dB] from
capacity, thus smart group partitioning shows a gain of roughly 1 − 2[dB]
over simple per antenna partitioning however we pay a price in some increase
in complexity due to the joint detection of the group elements.


40
Ray leigh Fading Capacity (Ntx=Nrx=4) Full Capacity
21 2G_OS_GD
35 20 2.9[dB] 2G_PA_GD
19 4G_OS_GD
18
1.7[dB] 4G_PA_GD
Bits/Channel Use
17
30 16
15
14
13 4.8[dB]
25
Bits/Channel Use
12
11
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
SNR [dB]
20
15
R a y l e ig h F a d in g C a p a c it y ( N t x = N rx = 4 )
28
27 2.2[dB]
26
10 25
Bits/Channel Use
24
23
22
5.5[dB]
5 21
20 3.6[dB]
16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
S N R [ dB ]
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
SNR [dB]
Figure 4.2: 4 × 4 Capacity Loss Per Antenna Vs Group Detection.


40
18
Full Capacity
1 7.5
0.26[dB] 2G_OS_GD
17
2G_SS_GD
35 1 6.5
4G_OS_GD
16
4G_SS_GD
Bits/Channel Use
1 5.5
15
30 1 4.5
14
0.3[dB]
1 3.5
13
25
Bits/Channel Use
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
S N R [dB ]
20
15
26
0.35[dB]
25
10 24
Bits/Channel Use
23
22
5 0.45[dB]
21
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
SNR [dB]
0
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
SNR [dB]
Figure 4.3: 4 × 4 Capacity Loss GD Optimal Search Vs Simple Search.

Chapter 5
Iterative Group Interference

Cancelation
The detector in Eq. (2.10) does not exploit dependencies between coded bits
which leads to degraded performance. The detector in Eq. (3.23) is an ap-
proximation to Eq. (2.10) and is even more information lossy since informa-
tion is not exchanged between groups. An optimal decoder would regard the
channel code and MIMO channel as serially concatenated codes and would
decode them jointly, such a decoder would have extraordinary complexity.
Many authors [21, 18, 19, 20, 12] propose to use iterative schemes since it
has been shown that such schemes are very effective and computationally
efficient in other joint detection/decoding problems [22, 23]. The iterative
scheme proposed here uses hard decisions from the decoder. Using soft out-
puts would result in superior performance however hard output decoders are
commonly implemented in many practical systems and are less complex then
soft output decoders. The iterative scheme proposed here is similar to the
48
CHAPTER 5. ITERATIVE GROUP INTERFERENCE CANCELATION49
one in [12].
For each group namely group G, hard decoded bits from the decoder are
re-encoded, re-interleaved and used to reconstruct a version of the transmit-
ted MIMO symbol from all symbols but the ones corresponding to group G.
This reconstructed signal is then passed through the effective MIMO channel.
Group Interference Canceling is performed by subtracting the filtered recon-
structed signal from the true received signal. The signal after Interference
Cancelation is given by:
¡ ¢
y iG = HG aG + HG aG − ai G +z (5.1)
| {z }
eḠ
The superscript i in Eq. (5.1) denotes the iteration number. Assuming
correct decisions ai G = aG the above expression is further simplified.
y iG = HG aG + z (5.2)
The noise after Interference Canceling (assuming correct decisions) is
white and thus a canonical front end matrix is the Matched Filter HGT
âiG = HGT HG aG + HGT z (5.3)
The group noise covariance matrix after matched filtering is no longer
white and is given by

- HGT
a y LLR
De-Interleaver
1
H + - H T
G
2
LLR

- H GT LLR
Ng
z π −1
()
HG 1
HG 2
HG Ng
Decoder
i i i
aG 1
aG 2
aG Ng cˆ
i
π ( cˆ )
i
Symbol
Interleaver
Mapper
Figure 5.1: Iterative Group Detection Scheme.
RνG νG = 12 σz2 HGT HG (5.4)
5.1 Group Partitioning For Iterative Group

Detection
The partitioning into groups for the iterative stage introduces a new trade
off with respect to the original group partitioning. In the first part of the
decoding process we traded off decoding complexity with performance, where
larger groups resulted in better performance and higher complexity. After
the first decoding pass we have hard estimates for all bits. If one partitions
the signal into large groups then one is using less ’new’ information and at
the extreme not using any new information when no partitioning is done thus
only one group (MAP decoding). On the other hand if one partitions the
signal into very small groups (at the extreme groups of 1 bit each) one may
be more susceptible to error propagation since one only has hard estimates
of the decoded bits with no reliability measure. The partitioning scheme
in Sec. 4 is no longer relevant since it does not take into account the new
information from the initial stage. We thus propose to use the simple antenna
partitioning which is in essence partitioning into groups of size one. The LLR
for group can be efficiently computed by Eq. (3.49) and by setting
³ ´−1
σz2
P = HGT HG HGT + I
σa2 N ×N
HG (5.5)
At the end of each iteration one obtains hard decoded bits that can be
used by the next iteration. Simulation results in chapter 6 suggest that
performing two iterations achieves most of the performance gain.

Chapter 6
Simulation Results
The performance of the GD scheme for MIMO-BICM was evaluated via
Monte-Carlo simulations. The simulator block diagram for the initial decod-
ing (non iterative) is depicted in Fig 6.1 while the iterative stage is depicted
in Fig 5.1. At the transmitter blocks (packets) of 2000 information bits were
encoded and interleaved using a rate 1/2 64 state convolutional encoder with
octal generators (133, 171) followed by a random per packet interleaver. in-
terleaving between packets would lead to improvement in performance at a
price of large latency. Two antenna configurations were considered, a 2x2 con-
figuration and a 4x4 configuration. For the 2x2 configuration the detection
schemes considered were full MAP detection, Per Antenna group detection
(conventional MMSE) and optimal search Group Detection all with zero,
one and two hard iterations. Most of the performance gain due to iterations
was achieved after two iterations. For the 4x4 configuration two partitioning
schemes were considered namely the partitioning into Ng = 4 groups of size
52
CHAPTER 6. SIMULATION RESULTS 53
Tx Module
b c
Random Bit Rate 1/2 Convolution Random MIMO Symbol
a (n)
Generator Encoder Interleaver P/S Mapper
Channel Module H ( n) Rx Module

MIMO Channel
Generator Find Group Partitionig
Compute MMSE Separtion Filter
Compute Noise Whitening Filter
AWGN Generator
Random Rayleigh z ( n)
Channel Generator y (n) Group Partitioning
H ( n) + WMMSE
Antenna Partitioning
mmse mmse
aˆ ( n ) aˆG ( n )
MAP b
de Viterbi BER
LLR Computer
y ( n) Interleaver Decoder Calculator
bˆMAP BERMAP
GD b
Whitening FIlter LLR Computer
mmse de Viterbi BER
aˆG ( n)
P/S

Interleaver Decoder Calculator
Whitening FIlter LLR Computer bˆ G D BERGD
PA
b
mmse
aˆG ( n) de Viterbi BER
P/S

Interleaver Decoder Calculator
bˆ P A BERPA
Matlab Code C++ Code (Mex)
Figure 6.1: Simulator Block Diagram (Initial Stage).

2 each and the partitioning into Ng = 2 groups of size 4 each. For both par-
titioning schemes the detection schemes considered were full MAP detection
(only for fast fading),Per Antenna group detection (PA GD - conventional
MMSE), Optimal Search Group Detection (OS GD),Simplified Search Group
Detection (SS GD) all with zero,one and two iterations.The complex MIMO
channel matrix entries were drawn from a zero mean complex Gaussian dis-
tribution with variance 1/NT in an iid fashion. Simulation results were sum-
marized via average Bit Error Rate (BER) and average Packet Error Rate
(PER) versus SNR1 plots.
6.1 Fast Fading
For fast fading the MIMO channel was independently generated at each in-
stant.
6.1.1 Fast Fading 2x2
Fig 6.2 presents simulation results for the 2x2 configuration for both 16 and
64QAM. Table 6.1 summarizes the gain of the MAP scheme over GD, the gain
of GD over PA and the gain due to iterations for each one of the schemes. The
gain was measured at a BER of 10−4 - 10−5 . The gains in Table 6.1 correspond
to both 16 and 64QAM since they were found to be similar. Performing
more than two iterations did not show much gain. Fig 6.2 suggests that the
n o. n o ±
1 2 2
The SNR is defined as E kHak E kzk = 1 σz2
GD gain over PA increases with the SNR. Without iterations GD shows a
substantial gain over PA. Performing iterations closes the gap between GD
and full MAP as well as the gain of GD over PA.
Table 6.1: Fast Rayleigh fading MAP,GD,PA BER Comparison, 2 × 2

Gain [dB] @BER MAP/GD GD/PA
10−4 − 10−5
No Iter 0.2-0.3 0.8-1.7
1 Iter 0.1 0.4-0.8
2 Iter 0.1-0.3 0.35
MAP Iter Gain GD Iter Gain
1 Iter 1-1.3 1-1.5
2 Iter 1 0.8-1
PA Iter Gain
1 Iter 2-2.5
2 Iter 1-1.5
6.1.2 Fast Fading 4x4
Fig 6.3 summarizes simulation results for the 4x4 configuration for 16QAM.
Table 6.2 presents a comparison between the various GD schemes and the
MAP scheme as well as a comparison between GD with group size of 2 to
that of GD with a group size of 4, the gain due to iteration is also included.
The results show that performing iterations reduces the gap between
MAP, the various GD schemes and PA.
Fig 6.4 presents simulation results for the 16QAM 4x4 configuration for
the various GD schemes with the simplified group partitioning (SS GD) al-
gorithms. Results were compared to those of the Optimal Search partition-

Ber(Snr) Mimo (2,2) 64QAM Conv K=7 ,Rate = 1/2

16QAM Coded PA Detection
16QAM Coded GD Detection
16QAM Coded Map Detection
16QAM 16QAM Coded IPA Detection
-1 0 Iteration 16QAM Coded IGD Detection
10 16QAM Coded IMAP Detection
16QAM Coded I2PA Detection
16QAM Coded I2GD Detection
16QAM Coded I2MAP Detection
0 Iteration 1 Iteration 64QAM Coded GD Detection
-2
10 64QAM Coded Map Detection
64QAM Coded IPA Detection
64QAM Coded IGD Detection
64QAM Coded IMAP Detection
Ber
1 Iteration 64QAM Coded I2PA Detection

-3
10
64QAM
2 Iteration
2 Iteration
-4
10
6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26
Snr
Figure 6.2: 2 × 2 16QAM,64QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh.
ing (OS GD). The simplified partitioning into groups of size 2 (See 4.2.1)
showed a loss of no more then 0.2[dB] with respect to optimal partitioning,
the loss after one iteration dropped to 0.1[dB]. The simplified partitioning
into groups of size 4 (See 4.2.2) showed a loss of no more then 0.35[dB] with
respect to the optimal partitioning, the loss after one iteration remained
around 0.35[dB].
Table 6.2: Fast Rayleigh fading MAP,GD,PA BER Comparison, 4 × 4

Gain [dB] @BER |G|=2 MAP/GD |G|=2 GD/PA
10−4 − 10−5
No Iter 1.5-2 1-2
1 Iter 1 0.5
2 Iter 0.6 0.3
|G|=4 MAP/GD |G|=4 GD/PA
No Iter 1 1.5-2
1 Iter 0.4-0.8 0.7
2 Iter 0.3-0.5 0.5
GD,PA |G|=4/2 Iter Gain
No Iter 1-2
1 Iter 0.4-0.7 1.5-4.5
2 Iter 0.1-0.3 1-2
6.2 Quasi Static Fading
For quasi static fading the MIMO channel remained constat over a duration
of a block and changed independently from block to block.
6.2.1 Quasi Static Fading 2x2
Fig 6.2 presents simulation results for 16QAM 2x2 configuration. Table 6.3
summarizes the gain of MAP scheme over GD,the gain of GD scheme with
respect to PA scheme as well as the gain due to iterations for each one of the
schemes all at a PER of 10−2 -10−3 .
6.2.2 Quasi Static Fading 4x4
Fig 6.6 and Fig 6.7 presents simulation results for 16QAM 4x4 configuration.
Fig 6.6 summarizes results for the partitioning into 4 groups of size 2 each

16QAM Coded 4G_PA_GD Detection
16QAM Coded 4G_OS_GD Detection
-1
10 16QAM Coded 2G_OS_GD Detection
16QAM Coded 4G_PA_IGD Detection
0 Iteration 16QAM Coded 2G_PA_IGD Detection
16QAM Coded 4G_OS_IGD Detection
-2 16QAM Coded 4G_PA_I2GD Detection
10
16QAM Coded 2G_PA_I2GD Detection
16QAM Coded 4G_OS_I2GD Detection
16QAM Coded 2G_OS_I2GD Detection
Ber
1 Iteration
-3
10
2 Iteration
-4
10
-5
10
7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
Snr
Figure 6.3: 4 × 4 16QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh.
using the simplified search algorithm, while Fig 6.7 present simulation re-
sults for partitioning into 2 groups of size 4 each using the simplified search
algorithm. Table 6.4 presents a comparison between the various GD schemes
at a PER of 10−2 -10−3 , as well as gain due to iterations.

16QAM Coded 4G_SS_GD Detection

16QAM Coded 4G_OS_GD Detection
0 Iteration 16QAM Coded 2G_OS_GD Detection
-1
10 16QAM Coded 4G_SS_IGD Detection
16QAM Coded 2G_SS_IGD Detection
-2
10
Ber
1 Iteration
-3
10
-4
10
-5
10
5 10 15 20
Snr
Figure 6.4: 4 × 4 16QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh Optimal Search Vs Simple Search.
6.3 Simulation Summary
Simulation results suggest that under a fast Rayleigh fading at low BER
GD achieves gains of 1-2[dB] with respect to PA. An extra gain of 1-2[dB]
can be achieved by choosing larger group sizes with a further complexity
price. Under for Quasi static Rayleigh fading at low BER GD achieves gains

0
10
16QAM Coded GD Detection
16QAM Coded IPA Detection
16QAM Coded IGD Detection
16QAM Coded I2PA Detection
-1
10
Ber
-2
10
-3
10
5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33
Snr
Figure 6.5: 2 × 2 16QAM Quasi Static Fading Rayleigh.
of 3-4[dB] with respect to PA. An extra gain of 5-10[dB] can be achieved
by choosing larger group sizes with a further complexity price. For both
Quasi static and fast Rayleigh fading performing hard iterations improved
performance of all the schemes as well as reduced the gaps between them.
Table 6.3: Quasi static Rayleigh fading GD,PA PER Comparison, 2 × 2

Gain [dB] @PER MAP/GD GD/PA
−2 −3
10 − 10
No Iter 4-8 3-4
1 Iter 4-5 2-4
2 Iter 2-3 2
MAP Iter Gain GD,PA Iter Gain
1 Iter 1-2 3-4
2 Iter 0.5-1 1
Table 6.4: Quasi static Rayleigh fading GD,PA PER Comparison, 4 × 4

Gain [dB] @BER |G|=2 GD/PA |G|=4 GD/PA
−4 −5
10 − 10
No Iter 3-4 1.5-2
1 Iter 3.5-4 1.5-2
2 Iter 2.5-3 1-1.5
PA |G|=4/2 SS |G|=4/2
No Iter 7-10 5-8
1 Iter 4-7 3-5
2 Iter 3-4 2-3
|G|=2 Iter Gain |G|=4 Iter Gain
1 Iter 5-6 2.5-3.5
2 Iter 2.5-3.5 1.5-2
PER(Snr) Mimo(4,4) Packet size 2000 infromation bits 16QAM Conv K=7 R=1/2
0
10
16QAM Coded 4G_SS_I2GD Detection
-1
10
PER
-2
10
-3
10
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Snr
Figure 6.6: 4 × 4 16QAM 4 Groups Simple Search Quasi Static Fading Rayleigh.
PER(Snr) Mimo(4,4) Packet size 2000 infromation bits 16QAM Conv K=7 R=1/2
0
10
16QAM Coded 2G_SS_I2GD Detection
-1
10
P ER
-2
10
-3
10
5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Snr
Figure 6.7: 4 × 4 16QAM 2 Groups Simple Search Quasi Static Fading Rayleigh.
Chapter 7
Conclusions
In this thesis we proposed a scalable reduced complexity detection algorithm
for MIMO-BICM. Complexity reduction was achieved by performing detec-
tion in groups instead of joint detection of the entire MIMO signal. A simple
group partitioning algorithm was derived as well as a approximate expression
for the LLR for group size of 2. Performance and complexity were shown to
be traded off by the selection of the group size. By increasing the group size
from 1 to 2 achieves gains of 1-4[dB]. Gains of up to 10[dB] were achieved
by using larger group size. A simple hard iterative interference canceling
scheme was further proposed to enhance performance. Performing hard iter-
ations improved performance of all the schemes as well as reduced the gaps
between them.
64
Chapter 8
APPENDIX
8.1 Simplification of Q̃(aG)

To simplify Q̃ (aG ) we first derive a closed form expression for Λ−1
G . Define
³ ¡ ¢−1 ´−1
σz2
P = IN ×N + σa2
HT H (A-1)
And note that

 
³ 2 ¡ ¢−1 ´
 
ΛG = 12 σa2  IN ×N + σσz2 H T H +VG (−I2x2 ) VGT  (A-2)
a
| {z }
P −1
1
Then make use of the matrix inversion lemma
 
1 2 
¡ ¢−1 T
Λ−1
G = 2 σa P IN ×N + VG I2x2 − VGT P VG V P (A-3)
| {z } G
T
Noting that
· ¸
1 − pjj pij
¡ ¢−1 pij 1 − pii
T = I2x2 − VGT P VG = (A-4)
(1 − pii ) (1 − pjj ) − p2ij
1
¡ ¢−1 T −1 ¡ ¢−1
A−1 − A−1 B D−1 + C T A−1 B C A = A + BDC T
65
CHAPTER 8. APPENDIX 66
Where pij is the i,j th element of P in Eq. (A-1).

To compute the first term in Eq. (3.33) we evaluate
¡ ¢
âTzf Λ−1 1 2 T T
G ei = 2 σa âzf P IN ×N + VG T VG P ei (A-5)
Noting that P converts ZF estimation into MMSE estimation since
·³ ¸T
¡ ¢T σz2 ¡ ¢−1 ´−1 ¡ ¢−1
âTzf P T
= IN ×N +
= P âzf H H H H σa2
T T T
H y
·³ ´−1 ¸T (A-6)
σz2
¡ ¢T
T
= H H + σ2 IN H y = W mmse y = âTmmse
T
a
The forth equality in Eq. (A-6) follows from the following Eq. (A-7)
³ 2
´−1 2
³ 2 ´−1
H T H + σσz2 I H T = σσa2 σσa2 H T H + I HT
· a
³ z z
´−1 ¸
2 2
= σσa2 I − H T HH T + σσz2 I H HT
z a
· ³ ´−1 ¸
σa2 T T σz2 T (A-7)
= σ2 H I − HH + σ2 I HH
z a
2
³ 2 ´−1
= σσa2 H T σσa2 HH T + I
z
³ z 2
´−1
= H HH T + σσz2 I
T
= W mmse
a
The second and forth equalities in Eq. (A-7) follow from the matrix inver-
sion lemma while the rest are trivial. Substituting Eq. (A-6) into Eq. (A-5)
yields
¡ ¢
âTzf Λ−1 1 2 T T
G ei ai = 2 σa âmmse ei + VG T VG P ei ai
(1−pjj )âmmse +pij âmmse

= 12 σa2 i j
(1−pii )(1−pjj )−p2ij
ai
¡ ¢ (A-8)
âTzf Λ−1
G ej aj = 1 2 T
σ â
2 a mmse
ej + VG T VGT P ej aj
pij âmmse +(1−pii )âmmse

= 12 σa2 i j
(1−pii )(1−pjj )−p2ij
aj
The last two terms in Eq. (3.33) evaluate to

a2i eTi Λ−1 1 2 T 1 2 T T

G ei = 2 σa ei P ei + 2 σa ei P VG T VG P ei
pii (1−pjj )+p2

= 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−pjj )−p
ij 2
2 ai
ij
(A-9)
a2j eTj Λ−1
G ej = 1 2 T
σ e P ej
2 a j
+ 1 2 T
σ e P VG T VGT P ej
2 a j
pjj (1−pii )+p2

= 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−pjj )−p
ij 2
2 aj
ij
Denoting by
(1−p )p (1−p )p
γii = 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−p
jj ii
2 ,
jj )−pij
1
γij = 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−p 2 ,
jj )−pij
γjj = 12 σa2 (1−pii )(1−p
ii jj
(A-10)
2
jj )−pij
then substituting Eq. (A-6,A-8,A-10) into Eq. (A-3) yields the final com-
pact expression
³ mmse ´2 ³ âmmse ´2
â
Q̃ (aG ) = γii ipii − ai + γjj jpjj − aj + γij (âmmse
i − pij aj )2
¡ ¢2 (A-11)
+γij âmmse
j − p a
ij i + C
Where C is not a function of aG and will cancel out in Eq. (3.32) and pi,j
is the i,j th element of P .
8.2 Computing Ree for the 2 × 2 scheme

Using the matrix inversion lemma follows that
· ³ ´−1 ¸
1 2 σz2
Ree = σ
2 a
I4x4 − H T HH T + I
σa2 4x4
H =
h i−1 (B-1)
1 2 σa2 T
σ
2 a
I4x4 + σ 2 H H
z
Denoting the ith row of H by hTi follows that

 
hT1 h1 hT1 h2 hT1 h3 hT1 h4
 hT2 h1 hT2 h2 hT2 h3 hT2 h4 
HT H = 
 hT3 h1
 (B-2)
hT3 h2 hT3 h3 hT3 h4 
hT4 h1 hT4 h2 hT4 h3 hT4 h4
Denoting the (i,j)th element of H by hi,j and by hR I

i,j and hi,j the real part
and imaginary part of the complex H respectively, follows that
¡ ¢2 ¡ R ¢2 ¡ I ¢2 ¡ I ¢2
hT1 h1 = hR + h21 + h11 + h21 = hT3 h3
¡ 11 ¢ 2 ¡ ¢2 ¡ I ¢2 ¡ I ¢2
hT2 h2 = hR 12 + hR22 + h12 + h22 = hT4 h4
hT1 h2 = hR R R R I I I
11 h12 + h21 h22 + h11 h12 + h21 h22
I
hT1 h3 = −hR I R I R I R I
11 h11 − h21 h21 + h11 h11 + h21 h21 = 0 (B-3)
hT1 h4 = −hR I R I I R I
11 h12 − h21 h22 + h11 h12 + h21 h22
R
hT2 h3 = −hR I R I I R I R
12 h11 − h22 h21 + h12 h11 + h22 h21 = −h1 h4
T
hT2 h4 = −hR I R I I R I R
12 h12 − h22 h22 + h12 h12 + h22 h22 = 0
hT3 h4 = hI11 hI12 + hI21 hI22 + hR R R R T
11 h12 + h21 h22 = h1 h2
Substituting Eq. (B-3) into Eq. (B-2)

 
hT1 h1 hT1 h2 0 hT1 h4
 hT1 h2 hT2 h2 −hT1 h4 0 
HT H = 
 0
 (B-4)
−h1 h4 h1 h1 h1 h2 
T T T
hT1 h4 0 hT1 h2 hT2 h2

σz2
Denoting α = σa2
and substituting Eq. (B-4) into Eq. (B-1)
 
1 0 0 0
  0 
Ree = σA2   0 1 0 
 0 0 1 0 
0 0 0 1
 T −1 (B-5)
h1 h1 hT1 h2 0 hT1 h4
 hT1 h2 hT2 h2 −hT1 h4 0 
+ α 0


−hT1 h4 T T
h1 h1 h1 h2
hT1 h4 0 hT1 h2 hT2 h2
Denote the scalars a, b, c, d

a = 1 + αhT1 h1 d = 1 + αhT2 h2
(B-6)
b = αhT1 h2 c = αhT1 h4
The inverse of the matrix in Eq. (B-5) can be computed in closed form
by noting that the matrix in Eq. (B-5) has the following block symmetry
· ¸−1
1 2 A B
Ree = σ (B-7)
2 a BT A
2
And then using the block matrix inversion lemma follows
· ¸−1
A B
=
BT A
· ¸
E −1 −E −1 BA−1 (B-8)
−1 T −1
−A B E A + A−1 B T E −1 BA−1
−1
E = A − BA−1 B T
Each one of the sub-matrices can now be computed in close form thus:
· ¸−1 · ¸
A B E −1 −E −1 BD−1
2 T = −1 T −1
C D −D B E D + D−1 C T E −1 BD−1
−1
E = A − BD−1 C T
· ¸
−1 1 d −b
A = ad−b2 −b a
· ¸· ¸· ¸
c2 0 1 d −b 0 −1
E =A− ad−b2
=
−1 0 −b a 1 0
³ ´
c2
1− ad−b2
A
· ¸
−1
¡ 1
¢ d −b
E = ad−b2 −c2 −b a (B-9)
2 32 32 3
d −b 0 1 d −b
c4 54 54 5
−b a −1 0 −b a
−E −1 BA−1 = (ad−b2 )(c2 −ad+b2 )
· ¸
c 0 1
= c2 −ad+b2 −1 0
· ¸
−1 T −1 −1 −1 T c 0 −1
−A B E = (−E BA ) = c2 −ad+b2 1 0
A−1 + · A−1 B T (E −1 −1
¸ BA ) =
1 d −b
(ad−b2 )
+
−b a
2 32 32 3
d −b 0 −1 0 1
c2 4 54 54 5
−b a 1 0 −1 0 (B-10)
(ad−b2 )(ad−b2 −c2 )
=
³ ´ · d −b ¸
1 c2
(ad−b2 )
+ (ad−b2 )(ad−b2 −c2 )
=
· ¸ −b a
1 d −b
(ad−b2 −c2 )
= E −1
−b a
Substituting Eq. (B-9) and Eq. (B-10) into Eq. (B-7)

 
µ ¶ d −b 0 −c
2 1  
Ree = 2  −b a c 0  (B-11)
σa ad − b − c 
2 2 0 c d −b 
−c 0 −b a
8.3 Whitening Eigenfilter maximizes the Mu-

tual Information
S
For simplicity we assume two groups namely G and G such that G G = Ω.
The output of the separation matrix corresponding to group G is given by:
âG = WG y = WG HG aG + WG HG aG + WG z (C-1)
The mutual information in Eq. (3.4) can be expressed in terms of entropy
¡ ¢ ¡ ¢ ¡ ¯ ¢
I WG y; aG = h WG y − h WG y ¯ aG (C-2)
Assuming Gaussian signals, the optimization in Eq. (3.4) is transformed
into
 ¯¯ ³ ´ ¯
 ¯WG · HG HGT + HG H T + σσz2 I · WGT ¯¯ 
2
G
WGopt = arg max ¯
¯
³ ´ a ¯
¯ (C-3)
WG  σ 2

¯WG · HG HGT + σz2 I · WGT ¯
a
8.3.1 Optimization Problem Simplification

σz2
For clarity of notation denote Y = WG , B = HG HGT + HG HGT + σa2
I and
σz2
A= HG HGT + σa2
I. Thus we need to solve the following
¯ ¯

¯¯ M ×N N ×N N ×M ¯ 
T 
M ×N
 ¯ Y · B · Y ¯¯ 
 
Y = arg max ¯¯ ¯ ,N > M (C-4)
Y  M ×N N ×N N ×M ¯ 
 
 ¯ Y · A · Y ¯¯ 
 ¯ T

where A is symmetric positive definite and B is symmetric non negative

definite. To solve the above we prove the following Lemma 1
Lemma 1. Let A,B be N × N symmetric matrices and Y be an M × N

matrix where N>M. If A is positive definite and B is non negative definite
the following optimization problems are identical:
 ˛˛ ˛
 M ×N N ×N N ×M ˛
M ×N  ˛˛˛ Y · B · Y T ˛˛˛ 
 M ×N
½¯
¯ M ×N N ×N N ×M
¯¾
¯
Yopt
= arg maxY ˛ ˛ ⇔V opt
= arg maxV ¯ V · Λ · V ¯ T
 ˛ M ×N N ×N N ×M ˛ ¯ ¯
 ˛˛˛ Y · A · Y T ˛˛˛  s.t
V V T =I
N ×N (C-5)
Λ =diag(λ1 ,··· ,λN )
N ×N M ×N M ×N N ×N
∀Y ∃ X , V :Y = V X ,V V T = I
Proof. Let X be N × N matrix such that as to diagonalize both A and B.

The existence of X is guaranteed by the following well known Theorem 1 [26]
Theorem 1 (Dual Conjunctive Diagonalization). Let A, B be N ×

N Hermitian matrices. If A is positive definite there exists X such that
X H AX = I and X H BX = DIAG(k) where k contains the eigenvalues of
A−1 B.
• If A and B are real then so are X and k

• If S is the positive definite square root of A then k contains the eigen-
values of SBS
If X is non singular then with no loss of generality we express Y as
M ×N M ×N N ×N
Y = L · X . (C-6)
Let X be the dual diagonalizing matrix of A and B, its existence is

guaranteed by Theorem 1. It is easy to show that given A and B the X that
performs the dual diagonalization of A and B is given by
√
X = U T A−1 (C-7)
√where U√ is the unitary matrix obtained by eigen value decompositiobon

of A B A−1 . From Eq. (C-7) follows that X is nonsingular since both
−1
A and U are non singular, and so there is no loss of generality for Y in

Eq. (C-6). From Eq. (C-7) follows that
XBX T = √Λ XAX T = I
T −1
X
√ =U √A (C-8)
A−1 B A−1 = U ΛU T
Since the square root of a real non negative definite symmetirc matirx is
symmetric and non singular
√ √ √ √ ³√ √ ´T
A−1 B A−1 = A−1 B B A−1 = M M T (C-9)
√ √
where M is real non singular, thus A−1 B A−1 is non nergative definte
and has non negative eigen values.
Λ = diag (λ1 , · · · λN )
∀i : λ i ≥ 0
With no loss of generality one can order U such that the eigen values in
Λ are in non increasing order thus λ1 ≥ λ2 . . . ≥ λN . Substituting X from
Eq. (C-7) into Y transforms Eq. (C-4) into
¯ ¯

 ¯M ×N N ×N N ×M ¯

 ¯¯ L · Λ · L ¯¯ 
 T
M ×N 
opt
L = arg max ¯ ¯ (C-10)
L  ¯M ×N N ×M ¯ 


 ¯ L LT ¯ 

¯ ¯
The above Eq. (C-10) is simplified by perform the following matrix ma-
nipulations
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯
|LΛLT | ¯ ¡ T ¢−1 ¯¯ ¯¡ T ¢−1/ ¯ ¯¯ ¡ T ¢−1 ¯¯ ¯¡ T ¢1/ ¯
T
= ¯LΛL · LL ¯
¯ = ¯ LL 2 ¯ T ¯ 2 ¯
|LLT | ¯ · ¯LΛL · LL ¯ · ¯ LL ¯
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯
(C-11)
¯¡ ¢−1/ ¡ ¢ ¡ ¢1 ¯ ¯ ¡ ¢ 1 ¡ ¢ 1 ¯
= ¯¯ LLT 2 LΛLT · LLT −1 LLT /2 ¯ = ¯ LLT − /2 LΛLT · LLT − /2 ¯
¯ ¯ ¯
M ×N ¡ ¢−1/
Denote V = LLT 2 L and noting that
¡ ¢−1/ ¡ ¢ 1 M ×M
V V T = LLT 2 LLT · LLT − /2 = I (C-12)
thus V is an orthonormal matrix. So follows that
¯ ¯
¯LΛLT ¯ ¯ ¯
T
= ¯V · Λ · V T ¯ (C-13)
|LL |
Substituting Eq. (C-13) into Eq. (C-10) concludes the proof.

. QED
8.3.2 Optimization Problem Solution

The solution of the optimization problem in Eq. (C-4) is given by the follow-
ing Lemma 2
Lemma 2. For M < N One of the M × N orthonormal matrices Ṽ satisfing

©¯ ¯ª
Ṽ = arg max ¯V · Λ · V T ¯
V
s.t
VVT =I
N ×N
Λ = diag (λ1 , · · · , λN )
λ1 ≥ λ2 . . . ≥ λN
is given by
h i
M ×M M ×(N −M )
Ṽ = I 0
and
¯ ¯ YM
¯ T¯
¯Ṽ · Λ · Ṽ ¯ = λi
i=1
Proof. Proof by Induction on M, we start with the induction base for M=N-1
Induction Base
h i
N −1×N −1 N −1×1
We need to prove that Ṽ = I 0 satisfies the following
(¯ ¯)
¯ N −1×N N ×N N ×N −1¯
¯ T ¯
Ṽ = arg max ¯ V Λ V ¯
V ¯ ¯
s.t
VVT =I
N ×N
Λ = diag (λ1 , · · · , λN )
λ1 ≥ λ2 . . . ≥ λN
¯ ¯ Q
¯ T¯
and that ¯Ṽ · Λ · Ṽ ¯ = N −1
i=1 λi
Proof. With no loss of generality we make the assumption that V that solved
the optimization problem has full rank. Selecting V which is not full rank
will render the determinat to zero. Since Λ is diagonal with non negative
elements on its diogonal such a selection of V will clearly not maximize the
determinat (except for the trival case where Λ is the all zero matrix)
Since V is full rank, with no loss of generality it can be expressed as
N −1×N N −1×N N ×N
V = PN −1 Q
N −1×N h i (C-14)
1×(N −1)
PN −1 = N −1×N
I
−1
0 , QQT = I
Substituting Eq. (C-14) into the determinant
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯
¯V · Λ · V T ¯ = ¯PN −1 QΛQT PNT −1 ¯ (C-15)
We now use the Cauchy Interlace Theorem [26]

Theorem 2 (Cauchy Interlace Theorem). Let A be an N × N real
symmetric matrix with Eigen values λ1 ≥ λ2 , . . . ≥ λN . Let A1 be the
N − 1 × N − 1 matrix obtained by deleting the first row-column pair of A with
Eigen values µ1 ≥ µ2 , . . . ≥ µN −1 . Then µk ∈ [λk , λk+1 ] ∀k = 1, ..., N − 1
From the above theorme follows that

¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ YN −1 YN −1
¯V · Λ · V T ¯ = ¯PN −1 QΛQT PNT −1 ¯ = µk ≤ λk (C-16)
i=1 i=1
h i
N −1×N −1 N −1×1
Let Ṽ = I 0 . Denote the principle N − 1 × N − 1 sub
(N −1)
matrix of Λ by Λ and so
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ YN −1
¯ T¯
¯Ṽ · Λ · Ṽ ¯ = ¯Λ(N −1) ¯ = λk (C-17)
i=1
and so Ṽ is an orthonormal
¯ ¯ matrix that acheives equality in Eq. (C-16)
and thus maximizes ¯V · Λ · V T ¯ . QED
Induction Step
h i ¯ ¯
M ×(N −M ) ¯ M ×N N ×N N ×M ¯
We need to prove that if ṼM = I
M ×M
0 maximzes ¯¯ V Λ V ¯¯ T
h i ¯ ¯
−1 M −1×(N −M +1)
¯ M −1×N N ×N N ×MT−1¯
then ṼM −1 = M −1×M ¯
maximzes ¯ V Λ V ¯
I 0 ¯
Proof. With no loss of generality let
M −1×N M −1×N M ×N N ×N N ×N
VM −1 = PM −1 PM Q QQT = I (C-18)
M ×N M ×N N ×N
denote VM = PM Q thus follows that
¯   ¯
¯ M ×N N ×N N ×M ¯
¯ VM Λ VM T ¯
¯ ¯ ¯ z }| { ¯
¯M −1×N N ×N N ×M −1¯ ¯M −1×N M ×N N ×N N ×N N ×N M ×N  M −1×N ¯
¯ ¯ ¯  T  ¯
¯ VM −1 Λ VM −1 T ¯ = ¯ PM −1  PM Q Λ QT PM  PMT
−1 ¯ (C-19)
¯ ¯ ¯   ¯
¯   ¯
¯ ¯
¯ ¯
From Theorem 2 and the induction base follows

¯ Ã ! ¯
¯M −1×N M ×N N ×N N ×M M −1×N ¯ YM −1
¯ ¯
¯ PM −1 VM Λ VM T PM T
−1 ¯ ≤ λi (C-20)
¯ ¯ i=1
Using the induction base by substituting ṼM into Eq. (C-20)

¯ Ã ! ¯ ¯ ¯
¯M −1×N M ×N N ×N N ×M M −1×N ¯ ¯M −1×N M ×M M −1×N ¯
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯
¯ PM −1 VM Λ VM T PM T
−1 ¯ = ¯ PM −1 Λ
(M ) T
PM −1 ¯
¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ (C-21)
¯ (M −1) ¯ QM −1
= ¯Λ ¯=
i=1λk
Thus ṼM −1 acheives equality in Eq. (C-20) which proves the induction step
. QED
The combination of the induction base and induction step proofs con-
cludes the proofs for Lemma 2 . QED
We have just proved that Maximal Mutual Information Group separation
matrix for group G is given by
h i √
M ×M M ×N −M
WGOpt = I³ 0 · U T A−1
√ √ ´
[U, Λ] = Eig −1
A B A −1
(C-22)
σz2
A = HG HGT + I
σa2 N ×N
σz2
B = HH T + I
σa2 N ×N
The above solution is not unique since multiplying WGOpt by any unitary
matrix of rank M will not effect optimality. The solution
√ can be interpeted
as a concainaiton of a group noise whitening matrix A−1 followed by an
eigenfilter matix
h i
M ×M M ×N −M
T = I 0 · UT
Deonote the covariance matrix at the output of the whitening matrix by
n√ √ o √ √
R=E A−1 (Ha + z) (Ha + z)T A−T = A−1 B A−1 (C-23)
the rows of T are the M eigenvectors of R corresponding to the M largest
eigenvalues. The eigenfilter is a known to maximze the Signal To Interference
Noise Ratio (SINR) and is the stochastic version of the matched filter.
Bibliography
[1] E.Zehavi, ”8-PSK Trellis Codes for a Rayleigh Channel”, IEEE Trans. Com-
mun., vol. 40, pp. 1064-1070, May 1992
[2] G.Caire, G. Taricco and E. Biglieri, ”Bit-interlived coded modulation” , IEEE

Trans. Inf Theory, vol. 44, pp. 927-946, May 1998.
[3] S. H. Muller-Weinfurtner, ”Coding approaches for multiple antenna transmis-

sion in fast fading and OFDM, ”IEEE Trans. Signal Proces., vol.50, pp 2442-
2450, Oct. 2002.
[4] M. K. Varanasi, ”Group detection for synchronous Gaussian code-division

multiple-access channels, ”IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 41, no4, pp 1083-
1096, Jul. 1995.
[5] Won-Joon Choi, Rohit Negi and John M. Cioffi, ”Combined ML and DFE
Decoding for the V-BLAST Systems”, ????? Star Laboratory Stanford Uni.
[6] Sana Sfar, Lin Dai, Khaled B.Letaief, Optimal Diversity-Multiplexing Trade-
off With Group Detection for MIMO Systems,” IEEE TRans Commun, Vol.
53, No 7, July 2005.
[7] G.J. Foschini, ”Layered space-time architecture for wireless communications

in a fading enviroment when using multi-element antennas, ” Bell Labs. J,
vol. 1, no 2, pp 41-59, Autumn 1996.
[8] I. E. Telatar, Capacity of multi-antenna Gaussian channels,” European Trans.

on Telecommun., vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 585–595, Nov. 1999.
[9] S. Alamouti ”A simple transmit diversity ” technique for wireless communi-

cations, ” IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications , vol. 6, no 3,
pp. 311-335, March 1998.
78
BIBLIOGRAPHY 79
[10] J. Boutrus, F. Boixadera, and C. Lamy, ”Bit-Interleaved coded modula-

tions for multiple-input multiple-output channels,” Proc. of the IEEE 6th
ISSSTA’00, New Jersey, Sept. 2000.
[11] J. Boutros, N. Gresset, L. Brunel and M. Fossorier ”Soft-input, soft-output

lattice sphere decoder for linear channels” IEEE GLOBECOM 2003, San
Francisco, USA
[12] K.B Song, and S.A Mujtaba,”A Low Complexity Space-Frequency BICM
MIMO-OFDM System for Next-Generation WLANs”, Globecom 2003.
[13] Michael R.G Butler, and Iain B. Collings, ”A Zero-Forcing Approximate Log-
Likelihood Receiver for MIMO Bit-Interleaved Coded Modulation”, IEEE
Commun Letters. Vol 8, no 2, pp 105-107, Feb 2004.
[14] D. Seethaler, G. Matz, and F. Hlawatch, ”An Efficient MMSE-Based Demod-

ulator for MIMO Bit-Interleaved Coded Modulation”, IEEE Globecom 2004
Dallas, Texas ,Nov/Dec 2004.
[15] Thomas M. Cover and Joy A. Thomas , Elements of Information Theory.

John Wiley, 1991.
[16] W. Yu and J. Cioffi, The sum capacity of a Gaussian vectorbroadcast channel,

IEEE Trans. Inform. Theory, submitted for publication
[17] J.M. Cioffi, G.P. Dudevoir, M.V. Eyuboglu and G.D. Forney, ”, MMSE
decision-feedback equalizers and coding - Part I:Equalization results” IEEE
Trans. Commun, vol 43, no 10, pp. 2582-2594, Oct 1995.
[18] B. Hochwald and S. ten Brink, ”Achieving near-capacity on a multiplean-

tenna channel,” submitted to the IEEE Transactions on Communications,
July 2001.
[19] M. Witzke, S. Baro, F. Schreckenbach, and J. Hagenauer, Iterative. detec-

tion of MIMO signals with linear detectors, in Proc. Asilomar Conference on
Signals, Systems and Computers (ACSSC), Pacific Grove, CA USE, IEEE,
Nov. 2002, pp. 289 -293.
[20] Boronka, A. Rankl, T. Speidel, J.”Iterative Nonlinear Detection of MIMO

Signals using an MMSE-OSIC Detector and Adaptive Cancellation”, ITG
Conference on Source and Channel Coding (SCC), Erlangen, Germany, Jan-
uary 2004, pp. 17-24. IEEE Trans Infomation Theory, Vol 43, No 3, May.
1997.
BIBLIOGRAPHY 80
[21] W. J. Choi, K. W. Cheong, and J. Cioffi ”Iterative soft interference cancel-

lation for multiple antenna systems”, IEEE Wireless Communications and
Networking Conference, 2000
[22] Xiadong Li and J.A. Ritcey, ”Bit Interleaved Coded Modulation with Iter-
ative Decoding,” IEEE Communications Letters, vol. 1, No. 6, Novermber
1997, pp. 169-171.
[23] S. Ten Brink, J. Speidel and R. H. Yan, Iterative demapping and decod-
ing for multilevel modulation, Proc. of the IEEEGlobal Telecommunications
Conference, vol. 1, pp. 579-584, November 1998
[24] H. Vincent Poor and Sergio VerdÚ Probability of Error in MMSE Multiuser
Detection, IEEE Trans Infomation Theory, Vol 43, No 3, May. 1997.
[25] G.D. Forney, Jr. Shannon meets Wiener II: On MMSE estimation in succes-
sive decoding schemes, To appear in Proc. 2004 Allerton Conf. (Monticello,
IL), Sept. 2004, Vol 43, No 3, May. 1997.
[26] Roger A. Horn and Charles R. Johnson. Matrix Analysis Cambridge Univer-
sity Press, 1985.

Reduced Complexity Demodulation of MIMO BICM Using Group Detection Thesis

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Reduced Complexity Demodulation of MIMO BICM Using Group Detection Thesis

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

THE IBY AND ALADAR FLEISCHMAN FACULTY OF ENGINEERING

DEPARTMENT OF INTERDISCIPLINARY STUDIES

Thesis submitted for the degree

Submitted to the Senate of Tel-Aviv University

Thesis submitted for the degree

coding of multiple-input multiple-output bit interleaved coded modulation

(MIMO-BICM) using IQ Group Detection (GD). It is well known that the

decoding complexity of the MAP detector for MIMO-BICM increases ex-

ponentially in the product of the number of transmit antennas and num-

schemes. We propose to reduce complexity by partitioning the signal into

detector. Complexity and performance can be traded off by the selection

of the group size. Group separation and partitioning is performed such as

to maximize the Mutual Information between the transmitted and received

signal. For schemes employing independent IQ gray mapping Conventional

MMSE per antenna detection is identified as a special case of group detec-

tion corresponding to a group size of one. It is shown that for moderate

larger group size with a further increase in complexity. We further propose

an ad hoc Iterative Group Cancelation scheme using hard decision feedback

I wish to express my appreciation and gratitude to RAMOT for providing

finical support throughout the research

I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to my parents and to

my girlfreind for standing by me along the entire research.

1 Introduction and Backgroud 1

1.1 MIMO-BICM Prior Art . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

1.2 Thesis Contributions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

1.3 Outline of Thesis Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2 System model and notations 9

2.1 Connection to MIMO OFDM . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

2.2 Review of MIMO-BICM MAP detection . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

3.1 Group Separation Matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

3.2 Group LLR Computation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

3.3 Simplified LLR Computation for group size 2 . . . . . . . . . . 25

3.3.2 Connection to MSE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

3.3.3 Simple Antenna Partitioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31

4.1 Simplified Partitioning for 2 × 2 scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36

4.2 Ad hoc Simplified Partitioning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

4.2.1 Simplified Partitioning group size 2 . . . . . . . . . . . 40

4.2.2 Simplified Partitioning group size 4 . . . . . . . . . . . 41

4.3 Mutual Information Rayleigh fading channel . . . . . . . . . 43

5 Iterative Group Interference Cancelation 48

5.1 Group Partitioning For Iterative Group Detection . . . . . . . 50

6.1 Fast Fading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

6.1.1 Fast Fading 2x2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

6.1.2 Fast Fading 4x4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

6.2 Quasi Static Fading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

6.2.1 Quasi Static Fading 2x2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

6.2.2 Quasi Static Fading 4x4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57

6.3 Simulation Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59

8.1 Simplification of Q̃(aG ) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65

8.2 Computing Ree for the 2 × 2 scheme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67

8.3 Whitening Eigenfilter maximizes the Mutual Information . . . 71

8.3.1 Optimization Problem Simplification . . . . . . . . . . 71

8.3.2 Optimization Problem Solution . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74

2.1 MIMO-BICM NRX x NT X System Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

3.1 Group Detection Scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

3.2 Simplified LLR computation for Group size 2. . . . . . . . . . . . 28

4.1 2 × 2 Capacity Loss Per Antenna Vs Group Detection. . . . . . . 45

4.2 4 × 4 Capacity Loss Per Antenna Vs Group Detection. . . . . . . 46

4.3 4 × 4 Capacity Loss GD Optimal Search Vs Simple Search. . . . . 47

5.1 Iterative Group Detection Scheme. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50

6.1 Simulator Block Diagram (Initial Stage). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

6.2 2 × 2 16QAM,64QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh. . . . . . . . . . . . . 56

6.3 4 × 4 16QAM Fast Fading Rayleigh. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58